[heavykevy]

I know this topic has not been conclusively decided and is extremely muddy (the legislature should really set this area in stone, forbidding the posting of signs), but what is the protocol for private businesses and prohibition of firearms? Is it best to live by the "No ask, no tell" principle?

During my firearms class, my instructor (a former LEO) taught that private businesses could not prohibit a permit holder from carrying at their business per Utah law and that any postings had no legal weight. However, the more I read the more confused I become. Apparently there is now case law that sides with private business?

Reading Utah Statue, "The provisions of Subsections 76-10-504(1)(a), (1)(b), and Section 76-10-505 do not apply to any person to whom a permit to carry a concealed firearm has been issued:"
Section 76-10-505 reads "(1) Unless otherwise authorized by law, a person may not carry a loaded firearm:
(a) in or on a vehicle;
(b) on any public street; or
(c) in a posted prohibited area."

So a CWP exempts an individual from being unable to carry "in a posted prohibited area."

Living in Utah, I am going to be going to Lagoon this summer to watch my child perform at a competition. According to Lagoon's website: "Disruptive activities will not be tolerated, including, without limitation:...Possession of firearms, knives, chains, or weapons of any type are prohibited."

If I am interpretting the laws properly, Lagoon's policy is moot and state law is the deciding factor. I would appreciate the options of more seasoned permit holders and if possible, direct experiences of carrying at Lagoon.

Sorry for the long post :shock: and thanks Jeff for the post with links to the laws.

 

[W. Clark Aposhian]

Heavy,
Posted areas only invoke criminal penalties if they are prohibited by statute as in "secured areas".
By the by, secured areas are only those that are
1. Allowed to be called secured by statute and,
2. Conform to the secured areas rules.
Case in Point the court are allowed to be called secured areas but are not secured under Utah law, as they do not conform to the rules, (they do not provide secure storage for firearms.)

Your instructor was correct, and yes you may certainly carry at Lagoon. No crime there.

As far as the property rights versus 2nd A rights. There is a balance which has yet to be tipped in either’s direct favor yet. This is despite Hansen V AOL as that was only with respect to an Employer and employee relationship.
Sincerely,
W. Clark Aposhian

 

[tapehoser]

heavykevy, your employer can still forbid the carrying of weapons, even by CFP holders.

 

[heavykevy]

Clark,

Thank you very much for such a concise synopsis! I knew that the UCC pros could help me out.

Great forum, I hope it continues to grow.

Kev

 

[scallywag46]

I agree with typehoser. Though your employeer can't LEGALLY stop concealed carry at the business, they can inforce company rules on their employees. They can't put you in jail for it, but they can fire you for breaking company policy. As far as customers carrying, the management can ask anyone to leave, but couldn't have you arrested for carrying, unless of course you would not leave, (thats tresspassing).

I'm no lawer either
Just my two cents.

Hey Hey... Stay safe out there.

Scallywag

 

[W. Clark Aposhian]

Yes they could ask you to leave and then if you remain on the property you are trespassing, but......an affirmative defense is that you were not
1. Interfering with the business of the proprietor or
2. Cause fear for the safety and well being of others.

That is an affirmative defense written into code that can be used to get you out of a trespassing charge. If this were communicated prior to trial the trespass action would probably never make it before the bench.
Sincerely,
W. Clark Aposhian

 

[Cinhil]

To say what I said on packing.org;

If property owners rights are to be respected, then why are some property owners able to thwart their rights over others-to the tune that they deny those others their right to carry their personal property on their persons?
Gun owners are property owners & as such we have rights too. Unfortunately our rights more often are abused and refused by other property owners-namely employers, whose abuse is too prevalent in society, and especially our state. We need to keep working to stop this abuse & change the laws/rules which these bigots hide behind!

 

[blackpuma]

Unfortunately our rights more often are abused...

Yeah, verily.

Also note, to violate employer rules is a violation of contract. This is a completely different topic. (And don't give me the crap that you're stuck in your job and have no choice, etc. You made your own choice and agreed when you signed the employment contract.)

People forget that there are TWO kinds of private property: real and personal. Real property is real estate, and personal property is everything that's not permanantly affixed to said real property.

But... this is not a property issue. It goes back one step further. Remember "Life, Liberty, and [Property]" from Rousseau as enshrined in the Declaration of Independence?

The Right to Exist ("Life"), the source of gun rights, trumps mere "property rights." People who focus on "property rights" are arguing the wrong point.

IMHO if people wish to prohibit others from exercizing their Right to Live (aka self-defense) on their [real] property, then they must post a very large bond and shoulder full indemnification (and all other forms of legal responsibility) for any crime against the person of the defenseless.

This would go a long ways to satisfying what I see as the real issue --- using the force of government to infringe my natural rights just because you disagree philosophically --- and with no responsibility on your part. THAT is what it's about in my book.

 

[scallywag46]

Blackpuma brings up a good point, that is if an employer denies you your right to protect your own life or the life of others, then the employer should shoulder that responsibility. I am looking at changing jobs, to an employer that bands guns on their own property. Sense I carry concealed for protection, then they would have to take on the responibility of my personal safety, even during my commute (they don't have gun lockers to store personal guns during work). If I was hurt during that time, the company should compansate me or my widow for the rest of my or her life. That may be a stretch, but if someone bands my rights, I would think they must carry that responsibility. Sounds like some type of legal wavers are in order here.

Scallywag

Hey Hey... Stay safe out there!

 

[Cinhil]

If everyone who has been with this site for some time, and those who are new, would check some of my past posts, I have definitively stated that according to our AG, Mark Shurtleff, that; Employers who refuse law abiding citizens, especially ccw permit holders, their right to carry while on theire premises, are responsible for any assault, rape, murder, robbery etc. which may occur with that employee both on their way to and from work, and while they work. They may be prosecuted for refusing you your legal rights.
I find this to be plain & concise language. I have also instructed my family to sue on my behalf should I die while going to or from, or while at work. I work for the U of U, which as we know, continues to this day to deny our rights, which also thumbs their collective noses at the law as written by our legislators, and which also contradicts the U's own employee/student handbooks!
I live with this abuse daily. I find it apallingly offensive, yet I must also earn a living. I have tried several times to get the U to allow me to carry, however, because I cannot produce the name of the individual who assaulted me, or his address, or SSN, or a valid restraining order-my rights mean nothing to the.
So, if something happens to you while going to or from your place of employment I suggest that you make sure that your loved ones know your wishes & sue the pants off of your employer.
:lol:

 

[tapehoser]

"So let it be written, so let it be done!"

Perhaps I just hadn't paid attention to a previous post where you stated that, but I am glad to hear it. I value my employment and enjoy what I do. But I hate the fact that I cannot carry at work. My employer even tried to get my into trouble a while back because I had an empty brass case on the premises. But since this specific 'prohibition' was not actually stated in the company's Code of Conduct book, I got off without a hitch.

I have been itching to write them an email or letter of sorts in opposition to their restriction.

 

[heavykevy]

I was reading about the Stadium of Fire and it reminded me that I hadn't posted about my visit to Lagoon last month.

There is really nothing to post (thankfully). I utilized my SmartCarry while at the park and we had a fun day with no problems other than huge lines and crowds. On top of that, unlike other trips from rural Utah to "the big, bad city" I didn't feel nearly as vulnerable.

Thanks again for all the help and thanks specifically to Clark for his continuing work with the lawmakers on cleaning up the right to carry and self defense laws!

Kev

 

[W. Clark Aposhian]

So did they have any type of detection, signs, anything at Lagoon?
Clark

 

[Jeff Johnson]

I've seen (and ignored) the no-guns signs at Lagoon. I also kept it well-concealed.

 

[heavykevy]

So did they have any type of detection, signs, anything at Lagoon?
Clark

As Jeff posted, when you go to purchase tickets they have a sign similar to the Guest Policies listed on their website. I personally wasn't too concerned about my safety while in the park, but I also didn't want to have to leave my firearm in the parking lot in my car.

 

[robbeaudin]

I always carry at Lagoon. I asked a friend of mine that works security there about their no firearms policy. He told me that the head of security informed them that if someone with a valid permit was found to have a firearm they are just to ask them to lock it in their car. He said that personally he would most likely just leave them alone though and tell them to make sure to conceal it better.