Cheyenne Mall Posted No Guns

[Mjolnir]

Thanks to the new carry law law that was shoved through without taking the time to actually read it and make sure it was a good bill the Cheyenne Mall is now marked no guns..as is the hospital in Cheyenne and a few other buildings in Cheyenne, have also seen no gun signs in Laramie and some other towns in the state.

No gun signs carry the force of the law and you must obey them or you can be held and charged with criminal trespass. This is for either open or concealed carry.

Per Wyoming 6 3 303

Criminal trespass; penalties.

(a)� A person is guilty of criminal trespass if he enters or remains on or in the land or premises of another person, knowing he is not authorized to do so, or after being notified to depart or to not trespass. For purposes of this section, notice is given by:

(i)� Personal communication to the person by the owner or occupant, or his agent, or by a peace officer; or

(ii)� Posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders.

(b)� Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, a fine of not more than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00), or both.

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/wyoming.pdf

Thanks guys for pushing a crap law making it harder for those of us who obey the law.

 

[SovereignAxe]

I feel your pain. We have the same law in TN, and as far as I'm aware, the mall in Johnson City has signs posted.

I'm still waiting on my permit and haven't got a holster yet, but when I do I'll be carrying an empty holster in protest (among many other places).

 

[t3a1s5]

Thanks to the new carry law law that was shoved through without taking the time to actually read it and make sure it was a good bill the Cheyenne Mall is now marked no guns..as is the hospital in Cheyenne and a few other buildings in Cheyenne, have also seen no gun signs in Laramie and some other towns in the state.


Thanks guys for pushing a crap law making it harder for those of us who obey the law.

You are dead wrong about this having anything to do with any new gun law. Trespassing has been against the law for a long time. The new concealed carry without a permit did not change anything about trespassing. You have made a wild and incorrect accusation!!

 

[rscottie]

Thanks to the new carry law law that was shoved through without taking the time to actually read it and make sure it was a good bill the Cheyenne Mall is now marked no guns..as is the hospital in Cheyenne and a few other buildings in Cheyenne, have also seen no gun signs in Laramie and some other towns in the state.

No gun signs carry the force of the law and you must obey them or you can be held and charged with criminal trespass. This is for either open or concealed carry.

Per Wyoming 6 3 303

Criminal trespass; penalties.

(a)� A person is guilty of criminal trespass if he enters or remains on or in the land or premises of another person, knowing he is not authorized to do so, or after being notified to depart or to not trespass. For purposes of this section, notice is given by:

(i)� Personal communication to the person by the owner or occupant, or his agent, or by a peace officer; or

(ii)� Posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders.

(b)� Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, a fine of not more than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00), or both.

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/wyoming.pdf

Thanks guys for pushing a crap law making it harder for those of us who obey the law.

When I read that it sounds as though someone, specifically the owner or occupant, or their agent, or a LEO, must tell you to leave and when you do not, you are criminally trespassing.

The carrying a firearm is a separate issue, although if you are discovered, it may result in you being asked to leave. It is if you refuse to leave after notification by the proper authority then you can be charged with trespass.

Am I wrong?

Perhaps posting the new law with it's penalties, if any, for disobeying a no guns sign would help clarify it for me. Does anyone have that?

 

[t3a1s5]

Perhaps posting the new law with it's penalties, if any, for disobeying a no guns sign would help clarify it for me. Does anyone have that?

That's my point. I don't think there is any NEW law. As a private property, the mall has always had the right to limit firearms. They had just recently decided to do so. This is not to be blamed on the legislature.

The only part of the law that is new is parts of 6-8-104. 6-3-303 is NOT new. 6-3-303 is how it has been for a long time.

 

[Mjolnir]

You are dead wrong about this having anything to do with any new gun law. Trespassing has been against the law for a long time. The new concealed carry without a permit did not change anything about trespassing. You have made a wild and incorrect accusation!!

Yes trespassing has been against the law except that almost nobody had any signs and the news stories abouot the new law had people getting spooked. they looked into the mater and found out that they can post property off limits when in the past nobody new and nobody cared as everybody had a permit to cary concealed issued by the sheriff and the state unlike now where anybody can carry without a permit.

Now the wyoming news is always talking about the new laws. Cheyenne 5 just ran 2 storys about the new law and the police are having a training to teach the new law with what you can and can not do. it is in your face and to many loop holes were left wide open.

Look at what the Casper city council is trying to do, ban all guns at the council meetings. they blame it directly on the new concealed carry law

The people who pushed the new carry law in failed to realize what they were doing and how it would back last in the court of public opinion.

Sure concealed carrywithout a permit looks great on the surface but in reality the anti gun horse has his full face under the tent thanks to how poorly this new law was written.

 

[rscottie]

That's my point. I don't think there is any NEW law. As a private property, the mall has always had the right to limit firearms. They had just recently decided to do so. This is not to be blamed on the legislature.

The only part of the law that is new is parts of 6-8-104. 6-3-303 is NOT new. 6-3-303 is how it has been for a long time.

So that leads me to ask this, is carrying a concealed firearm in the Mall trespassing if you are discovered in and by itself?

Say you are discovered carrying concealed, asked to leave and you leave, can the police still arrest you for criminal trespass?

Or, do you have to be discovered carrying, be asked to leave, refuse to leave, and the act of refusing to leave is the chargeable offense of criminal trespass?

Is there a specific penalty for violating the gun buster sign?

 

[t3a1s5]

So that leads me to ask this, is carrying a concealed firearm in the Mall trespassing if you are discovered in and by itself?

Say you are discovered carrying concealed, asked to leave and you leave, can the police still arrest you for criminal trespass?

Or, do you have to be discovered carrying, be asked to leave, refuse to leave, and the act of refusing to leave is the chargeable offense of criminal trespass?

Is there a specific penalty for violating the gun buster sign?

See, that's the key question. The sign I saw in the mall just said "no firearms". What if it had said "no bare feet". Would somebody be liable for trespass if they walked in barefooted. In most jurisdictions it's not trespassing unless you are asked to leave and refuse. The way I read 6-3-303 is that the sign posted must say "no trespassing" in order for somebody to be criminally liable for trespassing. Also, don't forget to defend private property rights while we are defending 2A rights. Any private property owner has the right to prohibit firearms on their private property. But, we have the right to do our shopping elsewhere.

No city council is allowed to prohibit open carry in their meeting. State law preempts such action. Concealed carry in government meetings is already against the law and has been for a long time. Best solution for the council's fear is to open carry themselves while meeting.

 

[Nascar24Glock]

I feel your pain. We have the same law in TN, and as far as I'm aware, the mall in Johnson City has signs posted.

I'm still waiting on my permit and haven't got a holster yet, but when I do I'll be carrying an empty holster in protest (among many other places).

I'll have to check it next time I'm there. I don't think I've seen the "required" signs posted (gun in slash-circle, or wording that has to be "substantially similar" to the actual words in the statute). I especially haven't seen any signs at the entrances to the major stores (Belk, Sears, JC Penny, and Dick's Sporting Goods). The only place it is posted is on a couple of the "mall rules" signs (of course, it's buried in a wall of text). So, arguably, that means that those postings don't meet the minimum statutory requirements for posting as off-limits, meaning that you couldn't be automatically arrested for carrying there (you would have to be arrested after refusing to leave instead).

That said, I don't recommend carrying there. First, even if their signs don't meet the minimum requirements, it's still bad form to carry in a place that makes it clear that they don't want them (remember, we as gun owners have to be a good example to others). Second, you could wind up being the "test case" for signs that don't meet the minimum requirement. Third, I am most definitely not a lawyer. Consult an attorney about all of the above.

 

[GLOCK21GB]

What ever happened to America ? the tree of Liberty needs to be watered..

 

[PlethoraGreen]

Thanks to the new carry law law that was shoved through without taking the time to actually read it and make sure it was a good bill the Cheyenne Mall is now marked no guns..as is the hospital in Cheyenne and a few other buildings in Cheyenne, have also seen no gun signs in Laramie and some other towns in the state.

No gun signs carry the force of the law and you must obey them or you can be held and charged with criminal trespass. This is for either open or concealed carry.

Per Wyoming 6 3 303

Criminal trespass; penalties.

(a)� A person is guilty of criminal trespass if he enters or remains on or in the land or premises of another person, knowing he is not authorized to do so, or after being notified to depart or to not trespass. For purposes of this section, notice is given by:

(i)� Personal communication to the person by the owner or occupant, or his agent, or by a peace officer; or

(ii)� Posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders.

(b)� Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, a fine of not more than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00), or both.

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/wyoming.pdf

Thanks guys for pushing a crap law making it harder for those of us who obey the law.

If you are going to post a statute post the entire thing. It tends to change things if you do that.

6-3-303.� Criminal trespass; penalties.

(a)� A person is guilty of criminal trespass if he enters or remains on or in the land or premises of another person, knowing he is not authorized to do so, or after being notified to depart or to not trespass. For purposes of this section, notice is given by:

(i)� Personal communication to the person by the owner or occupant, or his agent, or by a peace officer; or

(ii)� Posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders.

(b)� Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, a fine of not more than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00), or both.

(c)� This section does not supersede W.S. 1-21-1003.


1-21-1003.� Notice to quit premises required.

The party desiring to commence an action for forcible entry or detainer must notify the adverse party to leave the premises involved. The notice shall be served at least three (3) days before commencing the action, by leaving a written copy with the defendant or at his usual place of abode or business if he cannot be found.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


With the above context it all means something quite different to me.

 

[daveC]

different reading

I think the key phrase in the trespassing statute is, "knowing he is not authorized to do so." In other words, it is only trespassing if an authority has asked you to leave and you refuse OR it can be argued that you were there "knowing you were not authorized." Which is where the sign postings come in.

As a police officer in South Carolina I deal with trespassing cases a lot, and while I disagree with not being able to carry in the mall, if I had to make the case in court, I would argue that any obviously posted signs prohibiting the carrying of a firearm in the mall would reasonably inform a person who IS carrying that he or she is not "authorized" to be on the property with said firearm. Thus fulfilling the requirement for trespassing in that a person carrying a firearm in the mall would be there "Knowing he is not authorized," and therefore negating the necessity of having to ask the person to leave first.

Obviously WY is not SC, but I'm sure the court standards are likely similar, so I'd avoid carrying on any property where signs prohibit firearms, no matter how much I disagree. And as for 1-21-1003, that sounds like it applies only to "forcible entry" by another party, property owners, etc. I don't think it applies to trespassing, but I could be wrong. I'd have to read the corresponding statutes.

 

[PlethoraGreen]

Obviously WY is not SC, but I'm sure the court standards are likely similar, so I'd avoid carrying on any property where signs prohibit firearms, no matter how much I disagree.

But that's just it, there is no WY statute that gives a private business operating in the public the right to supersede state law (or state constitution for that matter), regardless of how many signs they post.

If I operate a business that posts a sign on the door that says "Striped shirts not allowed on these premises," I can't call the cops for every person that walks through the door with a striped shirt and wearing such is not even protected by the State Constitution. As a private owner, it is my right to deny business to anyone for any reason, but that doesn't instantly make it "criminal trespassing." It becomes trespassing when the individual has been informed of my wishes for them to leave the property and they do no comply in an immediate fashion.

Wyoming State Constitution

Article 1, Section 24. Right to bear arms.

The right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state shall not be denied.

 

[daveC]

But that's just it, there is no WY statute that gives a private business operating in the public the right to supersede state law (or state constitution for that matter), regardless of how many signs they post.

If I operate a business that posts a sign on the door that says "Striped shirts not allowed on these premises," I can't call the cops for every person that walks through the door with a striped shirt and wearing such is not even protected by the State Constitution. As a private owner, it is my right to deny business to anyone for any reason, but that doesn't instantly make it "criminal trespassing." It becomes trespassing when the individual has been informed of my wishes for them to leave the property and they do no comply in an immediate fashion.

Wyoming

Again, your courts might be different from mine, depending on judges and precedent etc, but you just said it yourself. As a business owner you DO have the right to refuse business to anyone, and it IS only trespassing when the individual has been informed of your wishes. However, I would argue that by posting signs prohibiting firearms, the business owner HAS informed you that he is refusing your business if you are carrying. Thus you are trespassing as soon as you walk by that sign into the business. You assume that a business owner couldn't do the same thing by posting signs prohibiting striped shirts, but only because it sounds absurd, not because the law says you can't. The prohibition of firearms on private property doesn't supercede the state constitution because it IS private property, and the individual has the right to ask anyone to leave their property at any time for any reason. Don't make the mistake of thinking that because a business is open to the public, that the property is not still privately owned.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic, I'm just making points based on how I've seen things like this play out in court. I'm certainly no lawyer, and I am definitely pro-gun. This is all just food for thought.
The right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state shall not be denied.
[/I][/B][/QUOTE]

 

[whyoh]

See, that's the key question. The sign I saw in the mall just said "no firearms". What if it had said "no bare feet". Would somebody be liable for trespass if they walked in barefooted. In most jurisdictions it's not trespassing unless you are asked to leave and refuse. The way I read 6-3-303 is that the sign posted must say "no trespassing" in order for somebody to be criminally liable for trespassing. Also, don't forget to defend private property rights while we are defending 2A rights. Any private property owner has the right to prohibit firearms on their private property. But, we have the right to do our shopping elsewhere.

No city council is allowed to prohibit open carry in their meeting. State law preempts such action. Concealed carry in government meetings is already against the law and has been for a long time. Best solution for the council's fear is to open carry themselves while meeting.

I'd really like to see the state law on this because Casper just passed a sweeping no firearm policy in their meetings

 

[Grapeshot]

I'd really like to see the state law on this because Casper just passed a sweeping no firearm policy in their meetings

ARTICLE 4 – REGULATION BY STATE
6-8-401.Firearm, weapon and ammunition regulation and prohibition by state.
(a)The Wyoming legislature finds that the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right. The Wyoming legislature affirms this right as a constitutionally protected right in every part of Wyoming.
(c)The sale, transfer, purchase, delivery, taxation, manufacture, ownership, transportation, storage, use and possession of firearms, weapons and ammunition shall be authorized, regulated and prohibited by the state, and regulation thereof is preempted by the state. Except as authorized by W.S. 15-1-103(a)(xviii), no city, town, county, political subdivision or any other entity shall authorize, regulate or prohibit the sale, transfer, purchase, delivery, taxation, manufacture, ownership, transportation, storage, use, carrying or possession of firearms, weapons, accessories, components or ammunition except as specifically provided by this chapter. This section shall not affect zoning or other ordinances which encompass firearms businesses along with other businesses. Zoning and other ordinances which are designed for the purpose of restricting or prohibiting the sale, purchase, transfer or manufacture of firearms or ammunition as a method of regulating firearms or ammunition are in conflict with this section and are prohibited.

 

[x1wildone]

Is there any info on Caspers ordinance? Wyoming state law would preempt any ordinance that I saw on there gov. site . And I would guess that firearms would not be allowed at city council meetings by state statute.

 

[MatieA]

Is there any info on Caspers ordinance? Wyoming state law would preempt any ordinance that I saw on there gov. site . And I would guess that firearms would not be allowed at city council meetings by state statute.

There is no such State Statute.

 

[t3a1s5]

To be clear, state statute prohibits CONCEALED carry into governmental meetings. There is no such prohibition on open carry.

I expect this issue to come up in this legislative session. There is a lot of concern about certain "sovereign nation" / "freeman" type people carrying into such meetings. It is going on at several city and county meetings across the state. The word is that these are not people who are merely carrying out their 2a rights and happen to be going into these meetings for other legitimate business. These are people who have publicly taken the position that elected officials in Wyoming are not serving a legitimate government and in some cases issued "warrants" for such officials' arrest.

The fact of the matter is that such behavior should be curtailed, not because they are carrying, but because they are displaying an open rebellion against legitimately elected officials. These idiots are handing ammunition (pardon the pun) to the gun control people and we are going to see limits on 2a rights come about because of it.

I'm not sure I even have a good solution to suggest, but you can bet that at some point the legislature will be looking for one. I have talked to several local elected officials who are pro 2a who are extremely fearful of this bunch of idiots.

 

[Grapeshot]

To be clear, state statute prohibits CONCEALED carry into governmental meetings. There is no such prohibition on open carry.

I expect this issue to come up in this legislative session. There is a lot of concern about certain "sovereign nation" / "freeman" type people carrying into such meetings. It is going on at several city and county meetings across the state. The word is that these are not people who are merely carrying out their 2a rights and happen to be going into these meetings for other legitimate business. These are people who have publicly taken the position that elected officials in Wyoming are not serving a legitimate government and in some cases issued "warrants" for such officials' arrest.

The fact of the matter is that such behavior should be curtailed, not because they are carrying, but because they are displaying an open rebellion against legitimately elected officials. These idiots are handing ammunition (pardon the pun) to the gun control people and we are going to see limits on 2a rights come about because of it.

I'm not sure I even have a good solution to suggest, but you can bet that at some point the legislature will be looking for one. I have talked to several local elected officials who are pro 2a who are extremely fearful of this bunch of idiots.

No "rebellion" against elected officials - just do as they say? What to do when said officials violate the intent, spirit and letter of the law?

Apparently some see just observing the proceedings as not "other legitimate business," especially if armed for their own defense. What other rights should be curtailed? OMG, they don't even live here.

BTW - Gun control advocates do not depend on being "handed ammunition." They manufacture their own even when the components don't exist - that is what they do.