Action on SB199 including parking lot carry

[Brian D.]

Has HB199 changed anything about a property owner posting NO GUNS on the entire parking lot of a shopping center, mall, or any parking area that is not under cover or in a building? I still see these signs occasionally.

I don't think so. For the last few years, leaving the gun in your vehicle has only been a civil, not criminal infraction on such properties. And it would be quite a legal system stretch for the landlord to win such a case.

[Qfac]

[quote

Has HB199 changed anything about a property owner posting NO GUNS on the entire parking lot of a shopping center, mall, or any parking area that is not under cover or in a building? I still see these signs occasionally.

I don't think so. For the last few years, leaving the gun in your vehicle has only been a civil, not criminal infraction on such properties. And it would be quite a legal system stretch for the landlord to win such a case.[/quote]

-----------------

I would question that as the new rules do not say employee, it called out a person. Also it calls out business entity and property owners - so from this I would think the new law could apply to all.

Prohibit a business entity, property owner, or public or private employer from banning a person who has been issued a valid CHL from transporting or storing a firearm or ammunition when the items are locked in a person's privately-owned motor vehicle on company property.

[JediSkipdogg]

Has HB199 changed anything about a property owner posting NO GUNS on the entire parking lot of a shopping center, mall, or any parking area that is not under cover or in a building? I still see these signs occasionally.

No, they just don't apply to employees anymore. So at best, one could argue the signs should now say "No firearms permitted on this property except by employees stored property in their motor vehicles."

[JustaShooter]

Has HB199 changed anything about a property owner posting NO GUNS on the entire parking lot of a shopping center, mall, or any parking area that is not under cover or in a building? I still see these signs occasionally.

No, they just don't apply to employees anymore. So at best, one could argue the signs should now say "No firearms permitted on this property except by employees stored property in their motor vehicles."

I disagree. Show me where "employee" is used anywhere in the new legislation. Yes, they can still post every entrance into a property, but the way I read the new law, if you store your firearm properly the sign doesn't apply to you storing your firearm in your vehicle in the parking lot, no matter who you are - employee or visitor, whatever.

However, I still believe that posting a sign at every entrance to a property *posts the entire property* including any buildings, whether or not additional signage is present on the buildings. So, this provides some measure of protection in the parking lot, but nowhere else. Yes, I'm talking about The Strip. And yes, that means you cannot legally carry into any of the shops or restaurants in The Strip or other similarly posted property. In my opinion.

[JediSkipdogg]

Has HB199 changed anything about a property owner posting NO GUNS on the entire parking lot of a shopping center, mall, or any parking area that is not under cover or in a building? I still see these signs occasionally.

No, they just don't apply to employees anymore. So at best, one could argue the signs should now say "No firearms permitted on this property except by employees stored property in their motor vehicles."

I disagree. Show me where "employee" is used anywhere in the new legislation. Yes, they can still post every entrance into a property, but the way I read the new law, if you store your firearm properly the sign doesn't apply to you storing your firearm in your vehicle in the parking lot, no matter who you are - employee or visitor, whatever.

However, I still believe that posting a sign at every entrance to a property *posts the entire property* including any buildings, whether or not additional signage is present on the buildings. So, this provides some measure of protection in the parking lot, but nowhere else. Yes, I'm talking about The Strip. And yes, that means you cannot legally carry into any of the shops or restaurants in The Strip or other similarly posted property. In my opinion.

2923.126(C)(3)(a) still exists...

If a person knowingly violates a posted prohibition of that nature and the posted land or premises primarily was a parking lot or other parking facility, the person is not guilty of criminal trespass under section 2911.21 of the Revised Code or under any other criminal law of this state or criminal law, ordinance, or resolution of a political subdivision of this state, and instead is subject only to a civil cause of action for trespass based on the violation.

Yes, it's civil, but it's still in there.

Interesting, I just looked up SB 199 and agree with you now. No mention of employee. So again, we have to conflicting laws. Either way, it's all civil, so the courts would have to see how they handle something like that.

[JustaShooter]

qmti wrote: "Has HB199 changed anything about a property owner posting NO GUNS on the entire parking lot of a shopping center, mall, or any parking area that is not under cover or in a building? I still see these signs occasionally."

No, they just don't apply to employees anymore. So at best, one could argue the signs should now say "No firearms permitted on this property except by employees stored property in their motor vehicles."

I disagree. Show me where "employee" is used anywhere in the new legislation. Yes, they can still post every entrance into a property, but the way I read the new law, if you store your firearm properly the sign doesn't apply to you storing your firearm in your vehicle in the parking lot, no matter who you are - employee or visitor, whatever.

However, I still believe that posting a sign at every entrance to a property *posts the entire property* including any buildings, whether or not additional signage is present on the buildings. So, this provides some measure of protection in the parking lot, but nowhere else. Yes, I'm talking about The Strip. And yes, that means you cannot legally carry into any of the shops or restaurants in The Strip or other similarly posted property. In my opinion.

2923.126(C)(3)(a) still exists...

If a person knowingly violates a posted prohibition of that nature and the posted land or premises primarily was a parking lot or other parking facility, the person is not guilty of criminal trespass under section 2911.21 of the Revised Code or under any other criminal law of this state or criminal law, ordinance, or resolution of a political subdivision of this state, and instead is subject only to a civil cause of action for trespass based on the violation.

Yes, it's civil, but it's still in there.

Interesting, I just looked up SB 199 and agree with you now. No mention of employee. So again, we have to conflicting laws. Either way, it's all civil, so the courts would have to see how they handle something like that.

They do not necessarily conflict. If you did not store your firearm properly, it still applies. If you are outside of your vehicle and carrying (but not in the process of storing the firearm in the trunk, etc.) then it still applies.

[djthomas]

However, I still believe that posting a sign at every entrance to a property *posts the entire property* including any buildings, whether or not additional signage is present on the buildings. So, this provides some measure of protection in the parking lot, but nowhere else. Yes, I'm talking about The Strip. And yes, that means you cannot legally carry into any of the shops or restaurants in The Strip or other similarly posted property. In my opinion.

Which creates some interesting and absurd situations, like Crocker Park. Property is posted and the signs have the absolute language about it being illegal to carry any firearm or deadly weapons on the premises. But one of their anchor tenants is an FFL (Dicks) where they notoriously and openly sell and service firearms and other deadly weapons such as machetes and crossbows.

No matter how they try to spin it, their signs conflict with what they actually enforce. There's no stated exception for "unless you're going to or from Dicks." When I lived closer I avoided the problem by just not going there at all. Now I sometimes forget the place even exists.