• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Hamburg Wal-Mart. OC'er tresspassed from ALL Wal-Marts.

garyh9900

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
153
Location
KY
Apples and oranges. Schools are NOT open to the public. Private businesses having rights to regulate their business is NOT absolute. A business exists at the pleasure of the state. And as I pointed out above the KY Supreme Court overturned a trespass conviction during an armed robbery. He left when shot at. But he was convicted of robbery.

A business cannot just ask a customer to leave if he is in the process of a transaction. It is not that simple.

When a business opens their doors to do business with the public they forfeit some of their autonomy. I speak from experience.

The problem is most cops are not taught trespass law. They end up violating your rights because they are ignorant.
But they don’t forfeit their right to determine the specific conditions someone will or won’t be able to come in. A business can decide it won’t allow people to carry firearms in on its property, and it is well within its rights to do so.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,187
Location
Kentucky
Here is a little history lesson for those of us here that are still struggling with our GED tests.

When Ky. first became a state, we needed laws and we needed a state constitution. Most of the population of KY, especially the educated ones, were originally from Pennsylvania. The people picked to write the first Ky. state constitution decided to copy large portions of the new constitution and many of the laws from those of Pennsylvania. That was particularly true when it came to the "Bill of Rights". The Pennsylvania "Bill of Rights" stated that:

§ 21. Right to bear arms.
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.


The people picked to write the KY Constitution thought that sounded pretty good, so they used that, word for word. In 1850, the constitution was changed to delete "shall not be questioned", and add "subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons." So that,"shall not be questioned" part has been gone for over 150 years.

Some people seem to think that wording is still there. Those people must have been educated 150 years ago.


The Pennsylvanian Constitution has the original wording to this day. Which state do you think has the best gun laws? The original wording of their constitution did not prevent the regulation of CC in Pennsylvania, even though their constitution doesn't cede that power to the legislature. Their CC law is more restrictive than ours. Their regulation of OC is more restrictive than ours. Retaining those words in their constitution didn't do the gun owners of Pennsylvania a bit of good and the wording of our constitution will not stop you from going to jail if you OC into a school. Those words do make for a long tedious and boring conversation on the internet by people that like to bloviate but have no solutions to anything. If I tell you I can run a mile in 2 minutes, you would probably say that I can't. Once I do it and do it for year after year, you will sound pretty stupid saying I can't.

I am still waiting on volunteers to OC into a school. Anyone interested? No? Anything else is just childish chatter.
This ain't PA.

There is no authority granted the state to regulate OC. So much so that since statehood there STILL isn't a shred of case,law,because,the charges,are thrown out.

The state has not been challanged in court on OC of a gun in schools.

But like the unconstitutional permit scheme ky had was gutted by popular demand , I believe we will be seeing guns allowed in schools by the state in the near future.

Or at min challenges to regulation of OC.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,187
Location
Kentucky
But they don’t forfeit their right to determine the specific conditions someone will or won’t be able to come in. A business can decide it won’t allow people to carry firearms in on its property, and it is well within its rights to do so.
No . It can decide if it wants a person to leave in ky. There is NEVER a mention of a firearm even if cops are fool enough to tresspass charge. And my friend there never will be in ky.
Why? Because there is no statute to charge under. Why? Because the state constitution does not allow it.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,187
Location
Kentucky
Here is a little history lesson for those of us here that are still struggling with our GED tests.

When Ky. first became a state, we needed laws and we needed a state constitution. Most of the population of KY, especially the educated ones, were originally from Pennsylvania. The people picked to write the first Ky. state constitution decided to copy large portions of the new constitution and many of the laws from those of Pennsylvania. That was particularly true when it came to the "Bill of Rights". The Pennsylvania "Bill of Rights" stated that:

§ 21. Right to bear arms.
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.


The people picked to write the KY Constitution thought that sounded pretty good, so they used that, word for word. In 1850, the constitution was changed to delete "shall not be questioned", and add "subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons." So that,"shall not be questioned" part has been gone for over 150 years.

Some people seem to think that wording is still there. Those people must have been educated 150 years ago.


The Pennsylvanian Constitution has the original wording to this day. Which state do you think has the best gun laws? The original wording of their constitution did not prevent the regulation of CC in Pennsylvania, even though their constitution doesn't cede that power to the legislature. Their CC law is more restrictive than ours. Their regulation of OC is more restrictive than ours. Retaining those words in their constitution didn't do the gun owners of Pennsylvania a bit of good and the wording of our constitution will not stop you from going to jail if you OC into a school. Those words do make for a long tedious and boring conversation on the internet by people that like to bloviate but have no solutions to anything. If I tell you I can run a mile in 2 minutes, you would probably say that I can't. Once I do it and do it for year after year, you will sound pretty stupid saying I can't.

I am still waiting on volunteers to OC into a school. Anyone interested? No? Anything else is just childish chatter.
So our state constitution means nothing. Our national constitution means nothing.

The BOR means,nothing.

That may be YOUR convction but it is not the conviction of most Americans sir.
Much blood has been spilled to protect your right to spout such drivel. Most Americans that have a basic grasp of history honor that sacrifice and are not willing to trample it " to get something done".


That thinking is how we lost the RTKABA, the protection of the 4th A , and other rights. To trade liberty for some desired goal in the name of politics.

It is not the thinking that will get them back
 

garyh9900

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
153
Location
KY
No . It can decide if it wants a person to leave in ky. There is NEVER a mention of a firearm even if cops are fool enough to tresspass charge. And my friend there never will be in ky.
Why? Because there is no statute to charge under. Why? Because the state constitution does not allow it.
What don’t you understand? The constitution only protects you from government actions. It does not protect you from the decisions and choices of private individuals and businesses. Again, do you think you can waltz into WKYT and demand airtime because the US and KY constitution gives you the right to freedom of speech and freedom the press? If not, why is your fantasy about firearms covered, but not freedom of the press or speech. No matter what you think, there is nothing stopping private business and property owners from deciding they will or won’t allow people to openly carry firearms on their property. I guess all the crayons in the world will not be enough to explain to you the basic concepts at play here.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,187
Location
Kentucky
What don’t you understand? The constitution only protects you from government actions. It does not protect you from the decisions and choices of private individuals and businesses. Again, do you think you can waltz into WKYT and demand airtime because the US and KY constitution gives you the right to freedom of speech and freedom the press? If not, why is your fantasy about firearms covered, but not freedom of the press or speech. No matter what you think, there is nothing stopping private business and property owners from deciding they will or won’t allow people to openly carry firearms on their property. I guess all the crayons in the world will not be enough to explain to you the basic concepts at play here.
I understand perfectly. I'm also tired of red herring arguments.

The FACT in this state is if I'm in your living room legally I have the the right to be armed in this state . Period.

You can tell me to leave gun or no gun, but what you cannot do is disarm me or demand I disarm.

Nor can a business. As you already know.

Its,not my fault you misunderstand the intent of freedom of speech etc and use them as red herring arguments.

Now you may keep misrepresenting the facts alone. This circle is becoming tiresome and you crayon insults are not at present something I have patientence to put up with.

Than you for up until your last post interesting discussion. Carry on .
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,115
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
But they don’t forfeit their right to determine the specific conditions someone will or won’t be able to come in. A business can decide it won’t allow people to carry firearms in on its property, and it is well within its rights to do so.
You are correct. A business can deny entry to fat people, short people or even people that don't speak english. But the question is, would a cop arrest someone for trespass because a fat person is trying to purchase a product sold by the business. I would bet not. Being fat is not a crime. Just like open carrying a firearm is not a crime.

Speaking in generalalities will usually not work well when you lack facts or case law to back-up your hypothesis. If you forgot, "No Guns" signs have no force of law.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,274
Location
White Oak Plantation
No gun signs are not the point, the property owner conveying their desires is the point. Ignoring a sign does not make you a criminal. You know that the owner will ask you to leave because you carry. You become a criminal if you do not leave. So, the property owner then bans you for life and you then ignore that order and you are now a criminal and he does not need to tell you to leave each instance you "go disrespectin" his property rights, he just up and calls the 5-O on ya...simplicity itself.

As to Walmart and boycotts, please research the term "same store sales." Walmart will change a specific store's behavior if that store impacts profitability of that store. Same store sales are a key metric...and boycotts can work, even on Walmart. The rub is that most folks do not participate in boycotts and as such that Walmart store will not experience any negative financial impacts.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,115
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
No gun signs are not the point, the property owner conveying their desires is the point. Ignoring a sign does not make you a criminal. You know that the owner will ask you to leave because you carry. You become a criminal if you do not leave. So, the property owner then bans you for life and you then ignore that order and you are now a criminal and he does not need to tell you to leave each instance you "go disrespectin" his property rights, he just up and calls the 5-O on ya...simplicity itself.......
So, you are contradicting yourself (see your post at 34). The business owner can have any desire he wants, but that does NOT give him the "lawful" authority to have a customer removed. Again I'm speaking from experience. To be trespassed you must be committing a crime.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,115
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
This is the banning of an open carrier at a Walmart in Lexington, Kentucky.


Right after Trayvon Martin I was told by Walmart in Vicksburg, Mississippi that they did not want me in there open carrying. They phoned someone and then went away and I never heard anything more about it. I have recently seen that the CEO of Walmart wants to re-visit the assault weapon's ban. So I suppose that I am no longer going to shop at Walmart. What do you open carrier's think?
HLB
From the Facebook post:
And didn’t respect my second Amendment! Walmart banned me from the stores as well as Sams club for life and the refused to sell me the $85 in items I wanted I even was honest about the soda I opened and wanted to pay for and they agreed for that but wouldn’t take my money For the other items!
He admits to shop lifting (THE CRIME) and he can't understand why he was trespassed. This guy is lucky he was not charged for the CRIME of shop lifting.

I think this discussion is over.......
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,274
Location
White Oak Plantation
So, you are contradicting yourself (see your post at 34). The business owner can have any desire he wants, but that does NOT give him the "lawful" authority to have a customer removed. Again I'm speaking from experience. To be trespassed you must be committing a crime.
Context...look it up....sarcasm...look that one up too...
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,187
Location
Kentucky
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say it was the guys behaviour that got him tresspassed, not the gun.

I've open carried in tons of different Wal-Mart's over the years without a glance. Wal-Mart mimics the carry laws of the state they are in.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,115
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say it was the guys behaviour that got him tresspassed, not the gun.

I've open carried in tons of different Wal-Mart's over the years without a glance. Wal-Mart mimics the carry laws of the state they are in.
I wouldn't say just behavior, I would say illegal behavior. He was cut some slack and just trespassed.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
744
Location
Central Ky.
I am not being overrun by volunteers to OC in a school. I wonder why. It's a lot easier to SAY that the government can not pass a law about OC than to actually DO something that would prove that. Talk is cheap.
 

HLB

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
37
There are a lot of viewpoints here, so I will just say:

Laws and Constitutions are written. As long as they retain the same text their meaning is more simple than complex. What people want is complex and time dependent. Government entities want their things (funding, power). Business owners want their thing (make money and CEO's/employees who have personal opinions). Individuals want their thing (freedom to carry or freedom to use some other power to keep others from carrying). At the time the Laws and Constitutions were written the authors knew what they wanted and did a pretty good job in context. Then they went on to the next thing and outside influences began to morph their creations. Now we the people have noticed how much our rights have deteriorated so we have started to exercise those rights - to test them. Things do not change over night. The Bundy situation was an exercise in that. I have had conversations about being in a weapons restricted place with armed officers while I was armed (always outnumbered). Sometimes I won and sometimes they won, but I can now carry in more places than I could 10 years ago.

Whether Walmart has the "right" to control my "right" to the extent that they seem to be going to depends on the weight you assign to the 14th and 2nd amendment and/or the respective state constitutions and laws. But whether I will carry in Walmart 10 years down the road depends only upon me and those with similar determination.

HLB
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,518
Location
here nc
I am not being overrun by volunteers to OC in a school. I wonder why. It's a lot easier to SAY that the government can not pass a law about OC than to actually DO something that would prove that. Talk is cheap.
Yes it is CHEEP as you chastise the membership, step up & lead instead of being the leader follower. Might remember one member has stepped out done coordinating their events ~ kudos to ya BB62!
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,518
Location
here nc
There are a lot of viewpoints here, so I will just say:

Laws and Constitutions are written. As long as they retain the same text their meaning is more simple than complex. What people want is complex and time dependent. Government entities want their things (funding, power). Business owners want their thing (make money and CEO's/employees who have personal opinions). Individuals want their thing (freedom to carry or freedom to use some other power to keep others from carrying). At the time the Laws and Constitutions were written the authors knew what they wanted and did a pretty good job in context. Then they went on to the next thing and outside influences began to morph their creations. Now we the people have noticed how much our rights have deteriorated so we have started to exercise those rights - to test them. Things do not change over night. The Bundy situation was an exercise in that. I have had conversations about being in a weapons restricted place with armed officers while I was armed (always outnumbered). Sometimes I won and sometimes they won, but I can now carry in more places than I could 10 years ago.

Whether Walmart has the "right" to control my "right" to the extent that they seem to be going to depends on the weight you assign to the 14th and 2nd amendment and/or the respective state constitutions and laws. But whether I will carry in Walmart 10 years down the road depends only upon me and those with similar determination.

HLB
Are you reading and interpreting those document from an originalist/textualist of putting today’s word meanings as well as our current generational biases into your perception of what the document mean?
 
Last edited:

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,115
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
I am not being overrun by volunteers to OC in a school. I wonder why. It's a lot easier to SAY that the government can not pass a law about OC than to actually DO something that would prove that. Talk is cheap.
If I'm on your ignore list I understand you keep asking this same question. Schools are NOT open to the public. And, gun or no gun, you can be trespassed just for being someplace without privilege. We are discussing places open to the public, not private places.
 

Dario

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2013
Messages
204
Location
Larimer County, CO
From the Facebook post:

He admits to shop lifting (THE CRIME) and he can't understand why he was trespassed. This guy is lucky he was not charged for the CRIME of shop lifting.

I think this discussion is over.......
Was that the reason the cops were called? Because I don't believe it's shoplifting unless you exit the store without paying for it, in this case it would be the plastic bottle not the liquid inside.
 
Last edited:

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,115
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Was that the reason the cops were called? Because I don't believe it's shoplifting unless you exit the store without paying for it, in this case it would be the plastic bottle not the liquid inside.
Most wrongdoers self confess as he did. It is irreverent why the cops were called.

I hope you are kidding about paying for the bottle and not the liquid inside.
 
Last edited:
Top