• 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.

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,731
Location
Granite State of Mind
Next time I'm in Ashland I'll test their no OC policy, see if I'm asked to leave.

Be doing all my hunting supply, ammo needs , and eveything else , else where.

Not sure what sign they will put up here. The only ones allowed by statute concern concealed carry, and they don't carry FOL .

Guess they will just run around telling alot of customers, here anyway they are tresspassing.
If you're going to do that, I suggest loading your cart with hundreds of dollars' worth of outdoor gear, before pulling off your cover garment. Make them choose.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,248
Location
Kentucky
If you're going to do that, I suggest loading your cart with hundreds of dollars' worth of outdoor gear, before pulling off your cover garment. Make them choose.
I'll go in with no cover, and get what a phone card as usual.
I highly doubt a word will be said. Could be wrong though.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,248
Location
Kentucky
If you're willingly giving them your business, you're not ignoring them.
Actually what I meant is I will ignore their stupid signs and remain armed.

Those who have created GFZ s have created killing fields. Both business and gov. And the blood of any innocents killed in those GFZ is on their hands as much as it is the shooters . Maybe moreso.
 

HLB

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
38
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?
See my new posting,
The Meaning of Constitution and Law...
HLB
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,200
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
I hope this to be a teaching moment.

As I stated above, this guy trespassed himself by signing the document. If the guy would have signed the document with the addition of “Without prejudice” his signature would not have/had any legal effect.

Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition.
Without prejudice. Where an offer or admission is made "without prejudice” it is meant as a declaration that no rights or privileges of the party concerned are to be considered as thereby waived or lost except in so far as may be expressly conceded or decided.
Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th Edition.
Without prejudice. Without loss of any rights; in a way that does not harm or cancel the legal rights or privileges of a party.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,248
Location
Kentucky
I hope this to be a teaching moment.

As I stated above, this guy trespassed himself by signing the document. If the guy would have signed the document with the addition of “Without prejudice” his signature would not have/had any legal effect.
In Ky he didn't have to sign squat.
And I'm pretty sure the manager had to ask him to leave ,and him refuse ,before the cops could do squat bwcause until then absolutely no law,was broken not did the cops have reason to believe one was or had been.

I do know one can open carry past a no gun sign right in front of a cop and he cannot legally act until the property owner trespasses him and he refuses to leave. The gun has no legal bearing at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HLB

HLB

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
38
I hope this to be a teaching moment.

As I stated above, this guy trespassed himself by signing the document. If the guy would have signed the document with the addition of “Without prejudice” his signature would not have/had any legal effect.
AT first I though signing the notice of restriction was just an acknowledgement that Walmart had told him to stay away, rightly or wrongly. But the part that says he acknowledges that he is prohibited from entering the property might put the lid on it. It must be really hard to act alone and be outnumbered by armed adversaries, stressed from previous encounters, know you will be under the public eye, interpret a document with a lawyers keen eye, and perform perfectly in such a way that your actions will ward off the binding opinions of evil judges sitting in their comfortable seats and receiving comfortable public salaries, all in a very few seconds.

I think this fellow did exceptionally well.

HLB
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,248
Location
Kentucky
AT first I though signing the notice of restriction was just an acknowledgement that Walmart had told him to stay away, rightly or wrongly. But the part that says he acknowledges that he is prohibited from entering the property might put the lid on it. It must be really hard to act alone and be outnumbered by armed adversaries, stressed from previous encounters, know you will be under the public eye, interpret a document with a lawyers keen eye, and perform perfectly in such a way that your actions will ward off the binding opinions of evil judges sitting in their comfortable seats and receiving comfortable public salaries, all in a very few seconds.

I think this fellow did exceptionally well.

HLB
He is a Kentuckian. He knew OC is untouchable here hence cops saying no charges.

All he was legally required to do was leave when asked BY THE MANAGER .

He didn't even need to speak to the cops and should be filing complaints that they approached him before he was asked by the manager,as they had no lawful authority to do until he refused to leave.

He did exceptionally awful.
 

HLB

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
38
He is a Kentuckian. He knew OC is untouchable here hence cops saying no charges.

All he was legally required to do was leave when asked BY THE MANAGER .

He didn't even need to speak to the cops and should be filing complaints that they approached him before he was asked by the manager,as they had no lawful authority to do until he refused to leave.

He did exceptionally awful.
Well, let me go back and watch the video again. I am having connection problems today so it may take a while.
HLB
 

HLB

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
38
Ok, the video I just watched was the one I posted on page one of this discussion. It starts where the one open weapon carrier is facing off with five policemen and they are returning his weapon because he committed no crime. At some point he mentions his partially consumed drink. I can not hear much of it but he is handed a paper to sign by the police and asks if it is from the store manager and if it is nationwide. The "public servant", who swore an oath to the constitution, then tells him he is a really bad person and does not understand what he has done, unlike the only ones who have infinite wisdom and are paid by taxpayer monies to live that wisdom. He does sign the paper. This video covers 3 minutes and 18 seconds.

I faced off about six federal agents and a city policeman at one point in my past. I also violated no laws. I was detained for about 20-30 minutes. My multiple weapons were taken and I paid a lawyer to get them back. After about 10 minutes, even though I was calm, my knees started to shake. This is very embarrassing when you know you are not scared, you know you have not violated any laws, and you are ready to fight for your rights because you know they are so important, but you options are very limited at that time. Based on my experience, I give this fellow a 5 star rating. It is easy to misjudge this episode much as a judge would when he is seated in his court room. Take that judge out of his controlled surroundings and he might well be pissing in his pants. I will pause at this point and ask if anybody would like to join me in challenging wrongful authority such as in this Walmart instance by standing up to the police in numbers. It is awfully hard when you are alone and have been stripped of your weapons.

HLB
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,248
Location
Kentucky
Ok, the video I just watched was the one I posted on page one of this discussion. It starts where the one open weapon carrier is facing off with five policemen and they are returning his weapon because he committed no crime. At some point he mentions his partially consumed drink. I can not hear much of it but he is handed a paper to sign by the police and asks if it is from the store manager and if it is nationwide. The "public servant", who swore an oath to the constitution, then tells him he is a really bad person and does not understand what he has done, unlike the only ones who have infinite wisdom and are paid by taxpayer monies to live that wisdom. He does sign the paper. This video covers 3 minutes and 18 seconds.

I faced off about six federal agents and a city policeman at one point in my past. I also violated no laws. I was detained for about 20-30 minutes. My multiple weapons were taken and I paid a lawyer to get them back. After about 10 minutes, even though I was calm, my knees started to shake. This is very embarrassing when you know you are not scared, you know you have not violated any laws, and you are ready to fight for your rights because you know they are so important, but you options are very limited at that time. Based on my experience, I give this fellow a 5 star rating. It is easy to misjudge this episode much as a judge would when he is seated in his court room. Take that judge out of his controlled surroundings and he might well be pissing in his pants. I will pause at this point and ask if anybody would like to join me in challenging wrongful authority such as in this Walmart instance by standing up to the police in numbers. It is awfully hard when you are alone and have been stripped of your weapons.

HLB
Stripped of my weapons in such a situation isn't going to happen in the first place. But let's say it does.

No problem standing up too, or simply ignoring cops attempting to do what I and they both know they have no authority to do.

Did it before don't mind doing it again.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,589
Location
here nc
HLB...your call [...anybody would like to join me in challenging wrongful authority such as in this Walmart instance by standing up to the police in numbers.] for police disobedience activism over the walmart/other national retailers engaging in their right to REQUEST their patrons to not OC in/on their property is quite provocative and overkill wouldn’t you ?

LEs are not involved whatsoever in ‘enforcing’ a retailer’s REQUEST not to OC within their facilities so how or why would you advocate citizen engage in such behaviour ~ especially when august members from this forum have OC’d in walmart facilities WITHOUT incident or interdiction from LEs.
 

HLB

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
38
HLB...your call [...anybody would like to join me in challenging wrongful authority such as in this Walmart instance by standing up to the police in numbers.] for police disobedience activism over the walmart/other national retailers engaging in their right to REQUEST their patrons to not OC in/on their property is quite provocative and overkill wouldn’t you ?

LEs are not involved whatsoever in ‘enforcing’ a retailer’s REQUEST not to OC within their facilities so how or why would you advocate citizen engage in such behaviour ~ especially when august members from this forum have OC’d in walmart facilities WITHOUT incident or interdiction from LEs.
Let us pull this apart and look at the individual elements.
1) The victim was shopping at a retailer open to the general public (not a membership based club).
2) The victim was violating no laws.
3) The retailer objected to the victim's presence.
4) The retailer called law enforcement to affect their desire.

There is a documented history of late where taxpayer funded law enforcement has been used to achieve one party's desires at the expense of another party. Had the Walmart manager taken on the task one on one then I see little problem here. Five or six to one is a different matter. I would say it is overkill. Funding such action with taxpayer money is a violation of the public trust of their government. Limited government also implies limited taxation. This is government overreach and bullying. It is only proper that the victim element rise to the threat, at least equally so.

HLB
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,200
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
In Ky he didn't have to sign squat.
And I'm pretty sure the manager had to ask him to leave ,and him refuse ,before the cops could do squat bwcause until then absolutely no law,was broken not did the cops have reason to believe one was or had been.

I do know one can open carry past a no gun sign right in front of a cop and he cannot legally act until the property owner trespasses him and he refuses to leave. The gun has no legal bearing at all.
I'm going to say this again: Businesses operate in a state at the pleasure of that state. Businesses open to the public do not have unfettered authority to demand the state enforce their policies. To be trespassed the law requires only one of two things; 1) a crime is being committed or 2) loitering, being their without purpose. It is that simple.

I just had this conversation with our local police chief. He did not dispute my statement. However, he runs a tight ship. He has made clear that a wellness check is one of the most dangerous situations an officer can deal with. Swatting comes to mind.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,589
Location
here nc
Let us pull this apart and look at the individual elements.
snippppp’d

There is a documented history of late where taxpayer funded law enforcement has been used to achieve one party's desires at the expense of another party. Had the Walmart manager taken on the task one on one then I see little problem here. Five or six to one is a different matter. I would say it is overkill. Funding such action with taxpayer money is a violation of the public trust of their government. Limited government also implies limited taxation. This is government overreach and bullying. It is only proper that the victim element rise to the threat, at least equally so.

HLB
Do you have a cite for your documented history to substantiate your hearsay post?

Further, swatting ~ citizens calling LEs based on unsubstantiated allegations against other citizens to get...

Finally, you have no earthly substantive idea why LE was called do you, another citizen? Walmart loss prevention? Walmart mgmt?

Yet here you are upon your shabby snake oil bandwagon being pulled by a worn out donkey, w/recorded drum & trumpet music blaring, pitching the magick cure for all to to hear...all without objective evidence except the newspeek/social media gossip?
 
Top