It was actually SB184 and went into effect (I think) 09-09-2008: http://archives.legislature.state.oh.us ... 127_SB_184" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Chuck wrote:I don't think so, MWSYMyWifeSaidYes wrote:Umm, you DO realize that was changed from a criminal trespass to a civil trespass just over a year ago (HB 234), right?Kenosis wrote:
This is how R.C. 2923.126 already works with regard to any parking lot you own. Even if you post signage all over the place, and someone drives past it into your parking lot, that's not a criminal offence. That's a civil offence. Ohio law allows employers to ban firearms in parking lots, but braking that rule does not brake the law, just the owner's policy.
If someone brakes your rule but causes no material damage to people or property, that is the very nature of a civil violation. Criminal penalties when no real damage or injury has been inflicted is excessive.
For the prior 11 years (2004-2015) it was criminal.
I'm pretty sure that's the way it was back in 10 when I got my first license
Denied rights by employer
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
- JustaShooter
- OFCC Coordinator
- Posts: 5800
- Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
- Location: Akron/Canton Area
Re: Denied rights by employer
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
- MyWifeSaidYes
- OFCC Coordinator
- Posts: 5449
- Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:59 pm
- Location: Central Ohio
- Contact:
Re: Denied rights by employer
Yep. My mistake.
HB 234 only EXPANDED the civil trespass from just R.C. 2911.21 to ANY criminal law, ordinance or resolution within the state.
HB 234 only EXPANDED the civil trespass from just R.C. 2911.21 to ANY criminal law, ordinance or resolution within the state.
MyWifeSaidYes
- MyWifeSaidYes
- OFCC Coordinator
- Posts: 5449
- Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:59 pm
- Location: Central Ohio
- Contact:
Re: Denied rights by employer
How about we let private businesses post CPZ signage, but remove their liability immunity if they do?
MyWifeSaidYes
- WY_Not
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 2435
- Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 10:15 pm
- Location: Miami County, OH
- Contact:
Re: Denied rights by employer
Or we leave the liability where it belongs... on the criminal? If people just have to shift some blame, then perhaps shift a little to the person who disarms and walks past a CPZ sign?
Learn how Project Appleseed is supporting freedom through Marksmanship and Heritage clinics.
Samuel Adams wrote:If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
-
- Posts: 16229
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
- Location: SW Ohio
Re: Denied rights by employer
The Tennessee Senate is floating a bill like that right now, number 184 or 186 I think. No idea of its chances.MyWifeSaidYes wrote:How about we let private businesses post CPZ signage, but remove their liability immunity if they do?
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!
********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
-
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 6:04 pm
- Location: Williams County, Ohio
Re: Denied rights by employer
It effectively works the same way as it does now:JustaShooter wrote: I may be wrong (and, if I am I'm sure someone will correct me) but the police will at most issue a ticket for a civil infraction, they will not eject or arrest them, correct? So how, again, am I to get someone to leave my property without the force of law behind the infraction?
-When signs have force of law, you call the police, the police talk to you and the trespasser, police remove the trespasser.
-When signs do not have force of law, you call the police, the police talk to you and the trespasser, police remove the trespasser.
The trespasser is removed regardless. The only difference is whether the State charges the trespasser with a crime after they've left your property.
Your property rights are satisfied when the trespasser leaves your property. That should be the end of it.
- JustaShooter
- OFCC Coordinator
- Posts: 5800
- Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
- Location: Akron/Canton Area
Re: Denied rights by employer
That's just it, for a civil infraction I don't think the police will eject them. I'm hoping one of those members affiliated with law enforcement will weigh in...Kenosis wrote:It effectively works the same way as it does now:JustaShooter wrote: I may be wrong (and, if I am I'm sure someone will correct me) but the police will at most issue a ticket for a civil infraction, they will not eject or arrest them, correct? So how, again, am I to get someone to leave my property without the force of law behind the infraction?
-When signs have force of law, you call the police, the police talk to you and the trespasser, police remove the trespasser.
-When signs do not have force of law, you call the police, the police talk to you and the trespasser, police remove the trespasser.
The trespasser is removed regardless. The only difference is whether the State charges the trespasser with a crime after they've left your property.
Your property rights are satisfied when the trespasser leaves your property. That should be the end of it.
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
-
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 6:04 pm
- Location: Williams County, Ohio
Re: Denied rights by employer
I don't see how this changes my statement. Is there a legal standard in Ohio that a given law has to be in force for a certain amount of time before it can be used as an example?JustaShooter wrote:Chuck wrote:MyWifeSaidYes wrote: Umm, you DO realize that was changed from a criminal trespass to a civil trespass just over a year ago (HB 234), right?
For the prior 11 years (2004-2015) it was criminal.
-
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 6:04 pm
- Location: Williams County, Ohio
Re: Denied rights by employer
I must not be making myself clear.JustaShooter wrote:That's just it, for a civil infraction I don't think the police will eject them. I'm hoping one of those members affiliated with law enforcement will weigh in...Kenosis wrote:It effectively works the same way as it does now:JustaShooter wrote: I may be wrong (and, if I am I'm sure someone will correct me) but the police will at most issue a ticket for a civil infraction, they will not eject or arrest them, correct? So how, again, am I to get someone to leave my property without the force of law behind the infraction?
-When signs have force of law, you call the police, the police talk to you and the trespasser, police remove the trespasser.
-When signs do not have force of law, you call the police, the police talk to you and the trespasser, police remove the trespasser.
The trespasser is removed regardless. The only difference is whether the State charges the trespasser with a crime after they've left your property.
Your property rights are satisfied when the trespasser leaves your property. That should be the end of it.
In states where signs do not have force-of-law, if someone trespasses, is told to leave, and they do leave, no crime has occurred. There's nothing for the police to arrest anyone for. The police will still remove them, the police just won't arrest them.
You, the private property owner, can still take civil action against them, you can still sue them, you can still file a restraining order...but the State won't charge them with a crime. You, the private property owner, can still do then everything you can do now. You, the private property owner, are not being denied any action you can already take today. You can still make your own rules and people are expected to honor your rules or leave your property.
This is about when the State acts against someone, not what rules private property owners can make.
- Chuck
- OFCC Director
- Posts: 4753
- Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
- Location: Licking County
Re: Denied rights by employer
Why would the cops "remove" someone from your property if they are not committing a crime?
Who wants to rely on the government for such mundane things?
If I call the cops on someone for trespassing on my land, I WANT THEM ARRESTED
Why else would I call them?
Who wants to rely on the government for such mundane things?
If I call the cops on someone for trespassing on my land, I WANT THEM ARRESTED
Why else would I call them?
Ain't activism fun?
"Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company. " - George Washington
"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something.
And because I can not do everything, I will not refuse to do the something I can do.
What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of GOD, I will do."- Edward Everett Hale (descendant of Nathan Hale)
"Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company. " - George Washington
"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something.
And because I can not do everything, I will not refuse to do the something I can do.
What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of GOD, I will do."- Edward Everett Hale (descendant of Nathan Hale)
- cashman966
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 3436
- Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 9:52 pm
- Location: Delaware, Ohio
Re: Denied rights by employer
Kenosis wrote: It effectively works the same way as it does now:
-When signs have force of law, you call the police, the police talk to you and the trespasser, police remove the trespasser.
-When signs do not have force of law, you call the police, the police talk to you and the trespasser, police remove the trespasser.
The trespasser is removed regardless. The only difference is whether the State charges the trespasser with a crime after they've left your property.
Your property rights are satisfied when the trespasser leaves your property. That should be the end of it.
I must not be making myself clear.
In states where signs do not have force-of-law, if someone trespasses, is told to leave, and they do leave, no crime has occurred. There's nothing for the police to arrest anyone for. The police will still remove them, the police just won't arrest them.
You, the private property owner, can still take civil action against them, you can still sue them, you can still file a restraining order...but the State won't charge them with a crime. You, the private property owner, can still do then everything you can do now. You, the private property owner, are not being denied any action you can already take today. You can still make your own rules and people are expected to honor your rules or leave your property.
This is about when the State acts against someone, not what rules private property owners can make.
I think it is you who is a little confused how trespass laws work.
In Ohio if you carry onto a parking lot that is posted as a gun free zone, you have committed a civil offence of trespass. If the owner notices and asks you to leave and you comply you have still committed civil trespass and can be sued in civil court for whatever damages the property owner can hobble together.
In the same situation, if you say "sue me" and refuse to leave you have now committed criminal trespass. As soon as you are notified to leave the property the Criminal trespass statute comes into play. The civil offense still applies but the decriminalization in 2923.126(3)(C)(a) only applies to the sign, not to verbal notification. If it takes the police to show up to get you off the property expect a criminal charge. Even if you refuse to leave and then change your mind once you realize the police on on there way, the property owner could still choose to file both a criminal and civil complaint if they have enough information on your identity.
And all of this would still apply if all no guns signs were relieved of their status as signage that meets the element of signage notification in 2911.21(A)(4)
I will go out on a limb and say that this would be true in just about any state that does not give a No Guns sign the force of law. If the police need to get involved it is a criminal matter.
Criminal trespass is an essential element to protecting property rights. There should be no need for quantifiable monetary damages to occur. The damage is to the owner's ability to control access to their property.
Last edited by cashman966 on Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ignorant or Stupid, I'm not sure which is worse. If someone were stupid, at least they'd have an excuse for all the dumb things they say.
Pass the Peace Pipe I need another hit
IANAL and neither are most people on this board, its just shows more with some than others.
Pass the Peace Pipe I need another hit
IANAL and neither are most people on this board, its just shows more with some than others.
-
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 6:04 pm
- Location: Williams County, Ohio
Re: Denied rights by employer
"Remove" can simply be giving a lawful order to leave, which if refused is a crime.Chuck wrote:Why would the cops "remove" someone from your property if they are not committing a crime?
Every single property owner in Ohio that has a no-gun sign posted, is who. You aren't allowed to enforce your sign when it has force-of-law. You get to decide if you want it enforced, but you don't enforce it.Chuck wrote:Who wants to rely on the government for such mundane things?
To save yourself from being sued by the trespasser.Chuck wrote:If I call the cops on someone for trespassing on my land, I WANT THEM ARRESTED
Why else would I call them?
You don't get to apply force to another person when they weren't damaging anything or harming anyone, and this conversation only regards simple trespass.
-
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 6:04 pm
- Location: Williams County, Ohio
Re: Denied rights by employer
That's what I said, right here:cashman966 wrote: I think it is you who is a little confused how trespass laws work.
In Ohio if you carry onto a parking lot that is posted as a gun free zone, you have committed a civil offence of trespass. If the owner notices and asks you to leave and you comply you have still committed civil trespass and can be sued in civil court for whatever damages the property owner can hobble together.
What part of my post are you claiming is incorrect?Kenosis wrote:This is how R.C. 2923.126 already works with regard to any parking lot you own. Even if you post signage all over the place, and someone drives past it into your parking lot, that's not a criminal offence. That's a civil offence. Ohio law allows employers to ban firearms in parking lots, but braking that rule does not brake the law, just the owner's policy.
You're a bit late to this conversation so I suggest you go back and read the entire thread because you're not understanding who said what.
Control of access is satisfied the moment the trespasser leaves the property. No additional action is warranted unless there was damage.cashman966 wrote:Criminal trespass is an essential element to protecting property rights. There should be no need for quantifiable monetary damages to occur. The damage is to the owner's ability to control access to their property.
-
- Posts: 16229
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
- Location: SW Ohio
Re: Denied rights by employer
My mistake, that bill has been passed and signed, soon goes into effect.Brian D. wrote:The Tennessee Senate is floating a bill like that right now, number 184 or 186 I think. No idea of its chances.MyWifeSaidYes wrote:How about we let private businesses post CPZ signage, but remove their liability immunity if they do?
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!
********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
-
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 6:04 pm
- Location: Williams County, Ohio
Re: Denied rights by employer
I just love it when someone comes into the the a thread 10 pages long, reads only a snipit and says "no your wrong" and then says exactly what I already said.