glocksmith wrote:
Hmm. Got a lot of old geezers on this forum. Only old geezers know the lyrics to songs like that
Which sign ?
The one that said "Long-haired freaky people need not apply."
Or
The one that says " GET OFF MY LAWN !"
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
glocksmith wrote:
Hmm. Got a lot of old geezers on this forum. Only old geezers know the lyrics to songs like that
And adding to the interplay, carrying in a statutory CPZ is a felony CCW offense because as you said, one's license is not valid there. Carrying against the wishes of a private property owner is explicitly NOT a CCW offense - it's criminal trespass. So as far as carrying a concealed weapon on private premises goes, yes the license does allow you to do so notwithstanding the general prohibition against carrying concealed weapons in this state. But it does not excuse you from charges of trespassing. Since we're all law abiding folks here and the distinction between a felony and a misdemeanor is irrelevant I'll steal a line from the not-quite-President: "What difference, at this point, does it make?" Fun times.schmieg wrote:The ORC states that the license is good in the entire state except for ... Thus, there is no otherwise authorized by law basis for the statutory CPZ's. The license is not valid in those locations period. For the private property issue, either the owner of the property or the court will decide what it means. I can make an argument either way, but I fear that the courts would take the position that there is no exception to the posted private property ban in the law, so carry is not otherwise authorized. We're back to if you are asked to leave, do not pass go, do not collect $200, just leave.