Carrying Concealed When It's Prohibited

[SolaScriptura]

I understand private property. But not all private property is too private. Something like a mall, that may technically be considered "privately owned" is still public in terms of who is using it.

 

[Wannabee]

A man's house is his castle, and he has the right to defend, restrict entry or otherwise set policies as he sees fit. That goes for any private property. Businesses are inviting you to enter, so should post if they prefer guests to not carry weapons. But to enter another's home with a concealed weapon is to make one an invader rather than a guest.

 

[DonP]

Unless it becomes public access property by common law default.

If you don't lock it up 1 day a year some places in Cal I know for sure lose private rights. Like if you have a walkway by your house to the beach and you let people walk through, 1 day a year you have to chain it off or you lose right to control it and it becomes public domain.

BYW there is no private property in the US, if you don't have Allodial title then you only have a deed of trust, someone else, the state, actually owns it and can kick you off anytime.

So you maybe have manager or trustee rights to control the property by not private owner rights, its a fiction of law.

Where are our lawyers on PB when you need one?

 

[Rich Koster]

I would not carry concealed in restricted areas unless a moderate level of anarchy is anticipated. Then I would consider it Biblically and Confessionally acceptable.

 

[gene_mingo]

I believe that owners of private business need to provide a place to store your weapon if they have a prohibition on carrying them. If they do not provide this I believe they cannot prohibit you carrying legally.

You are incorrect. Private property rights precede all other rights. They are the foundation of liberty and the pursuit of happiness. What right do you have to tell a person what they can do with their property? Does that mean I must allow smokers because smoking is legal? I must allow p0rnography, because that is legal?

I am all for concealed carry laws. But the above statement goes way too far.

hmm, the state of AZ seems to think they can legislate behavior on private property. Furthermore when you open a business to public commerce you give up certain privileges that private ownership carry.

Both of your examples are bad. In Az it is against the law to smoke in any building open to the public and it is against the law to exhibit **** to minors. So neither of your examples actual reflect lawful behavior to begin with. Whether or not a sign saying no guns are allowed in a business is enforceable is a matter of state law and varies from state to state.

As for private property, which wasn't part of the discussion to begin with, a property owner who is renting or leasing usually cannot restrict a tenant from possessing a firearm on their property as well. Again these laws vary from state to state.

 

[mgeoffriau]

I do not carry in places the law prohibits me from carrying. My views on this may change, but at the moment, my feeling is that it's not worth losing my legal right to carry for the rest of my life.

For private property, it's a judgment call. If I don't feel a particular need to carry, and the owner has the legally appropriate sign posted, I won't carry. If I want to carry, and there's some question about whether they have posted appropriate notices, I will carry anyway. All they can do is require I leave the property (in Mississippi you cannot be arrested for carrying on private property, regardless of signs; you can only be arrested for trespassing, so as long as you leave when asked there is zero legal liability).

 

[Glenn Ferrell]

In some states (I know this is true of Kentucky and Idaho, both very pro-gun states, in which I’ve held a license to CCW) which allow private property owners to post a restriction to conceal carry, the only consequence of their noticing you are carrying (remember “concealed” means they’re not suppose to see it), is they can ask you to leave. Only if you refuse to leave can you be charged with a misdemeanor. In both Idaho and Kentucky open carry is a guaranteed right which can not be preempted by local jurisdictions.

 

[okcalvin]

Of course we won't go into US Army regs and Federal Law prohibiting chaplains from being armed ('though Geneva Conventions allow it). I've talked with guys who were in the South African forces whose chaplains were armed with G-3s.

(FYI, I'm a former OKARNG chaplain)

________________
John Owen Butler
Pastor-Teacher
Beal Heights PCA
Lawton, OK

 

[Montanablue]

Of course we won't go into US Army regs and Federal Law prohibiting chaplains from being armed ('though Geneva Conventions allow it). I've talked with guys who were in the South African forces whose chaplains were armed with G-3s.

(FYI, I'm a former OKARNG chaplain)

________________
John Owen Butler
Pastor-Teacher
Beal Heights PCA
Lawton, OK

Isn't the purpose of this to keep an enemy from mistaking the chaplain as a combatant? I only ask because I can't really think of another reason to keep a chaplain from having a weapon for self defense...

 

[Croghanite]

In SC, I have to inform the owner of a dwelling that I am carrying concealed before I enter his home.

That's a hard one to abide by. Hello there, nice to meet you..... by the way I have a .45 in my pants and a .38 around my ankle.

 

[Skyler]

In SC, I have to inform the owner of a dwelling that I am carrying concealed before I enter his home.

That's a hard one to abide by. Hello there, nice to meet you..... by the way I have a .45 in my pants and a .38 around my ankle.

Just make a cool T-shirt that says something about carrying concealed.

 

[Craig]

In SC, I have to inform the owner of a dwelling that I am carrying concealed before I enter his home.

That's a hard one to abide by. Hello there, nice to meet you..... by the way I have a .45 in my pants and a .38 around my ankle.

In Ohio, we are also required by law to tell a policeman we're carrying concealed if pulled over...one of the first things you tell a cop after he (she *sigh*) may already want to give you a hard time.

 

[Brian Withnell]

When they pass the law here as they did in UK And Aus, to ban guns will you submit to your govt you live under and turn in your gun or lie or shoot it out with them?

I am very grateful that I am not a lesser magistrate in that land, or I would have had to call out the militia to resist the unlawful (unlawful in God's law) forbidding of having the means of self-defense that is just (in God's justice) that is reasonable for men to have. It is shameful for those lesser magistrates that they did not call upon those in their care to rise up and throw off the tyrants that subvert justice and human civil rights by outlawing guns. Let us hope the lesser magistrates here know their duty and are not such cowards that they would bow to such tyranny.

-----Added 4/10/2009 at 02:29:00 EST-----

Not according to Paul in Romans 13. "There is no power but that which has been ordained by God." He who resists that power is therefore resisting an ordinance of God.

Seems pretty clear to me what the Christian's response should be.

Unless you happen to be a lesser magistrate. Then you are an authority as well, and you have the duty to call for the militia to throw off the unlawful higher authority. If you follow the lesser magistrate, then you are following the law.

This was played out during the war of northern aggression in the United States, when those that fought in the CSFA were not charged with any crime ... in fact Jefferson Davis was not even charged (and he was the President of the Confederate States of America) for the same reason. Even though the North was totally wrong in pursuing war against the states that were seceding (the right to secede was not given exclusively to the federal government nor prohibited to the states, and therefore is a right reserved to the states and the people) they at least knew the principles of the lesser magistrate. We fought the war of independence from Britain on the same principle.

 

[JoeRe4mer]

I would not carry concealed in restricted areas unless a moderate level of anarchy is anticipated. Then I would consider it Biblically and Confessionally acceptable.

That's a pretty good response I would say. There are very few cases in life where we are truly justified in breaking the law.

-----Added 4/14/2009 at 09:00:39 EST-----

In SC, I have to inform the owner of a dwelling that I am carrying concealed before I enter his home.

That's a hard one to abide by. Hello there, nice to meet you..... by the way I have a .45 in my pants and a .38 around my ankle.

In Ohio, we are also required by law to tell a policeman we're carrying concealed if pulled over...one of the first things you tell a cop after he (she *sigh*) may already want to give you a hard time.

Last Christmas I was pulled over by the Toledo PD for speeding and I told them I had a CCW, the cop was cool and said thanks for letting me know. Most police are HUGE 2nd Amendment advocates and as long as you are not breaking the law you will be fine. As scripture says ruling authorities are not a terror to good works. Rom 13

Also, why do you say he (she *sigh*)?

 

[SolaScriptura]

Most police are HUGE 2nd Amendment advocates and as long as you are not breaking the law you will be fine.

You really think so? While I have encountered some conservative police officers, most of the cops I've met in metropolitan areas are pretty liberal and think that private gun ownership puts them at risk, puts other citizens at risk, and is generally speaking a bad idea. Many of them totally buy into the whole liberal nanny-state idea.

 

[DonP]

Well I certainly can understand when they are restricted to what guns they can have and are under gunned to the criminals.

I think they should be unrestricted.

Then maybe they wouldn't want us disarmed