TyGuy Posted March 31, 2014 at 08:53 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 08:53 PM 1) We kinda talked around this in the other posted threads, but I want to ask the question directly. 2) A business owner I was talking to about No Guns No Money asked me. 3) I know this might cause a crap storm. If a business owner posts OFFICIAL no guns signs does it also apply to them? I know they won't call the police on themselves, but technically should they legally be disarmed in that location then? My understanding is that it does apply to everyone there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmagloo Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:02 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:02 PM Imho, no. The business owner can still carry on his own property irregardless of the signage directed towards others. The question does however get fuzzy when it comes to his employees, if he has posted. The way I read it, the employees would be banned too, unless they owned an equity portion of the business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
III Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:04 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:04 PM 1) We kinda talked around this in the other posted threads, but I want to ask the question directly. 2) A business owner I was talking to about No Guns No Money asked me. 3) I know this might cause a crap storm. If a business owner posts OFFICIAL no guns signs does it also apply to them? I know they won't call the police on themselves, but technically should they legally be disarmed in that location then? My understanding is that it does apply to everyone there. I think it depends on whether or not the business owner is also the building owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:06 PM Author Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:06 PM Where do you find those exemptions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:07 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:07 PM I don't think it is a problem for an owner to carry when he restricts others (other than my feelings being hurt). If you own the property, you don't need a FCCL to carry anyhow. I try and find those exemptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:07 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:07 PM Or are you saying they would be carrying under the normal property owner/place of business exemption? ^^^ I think this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:07 PM Author Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:07 PM Or are you saying they would be carrying under the normal property owner/place of business exemption? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
III Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:09 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:09 PM Or are you saying they would be carrying under the normal property owner/place of business exemption? I am saying that if they own the business AND the building...they can carry irregardless of the sign. I am saying that it is a very grey area if the own the business but do not own the building and the owner of the building posts the sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:13 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:13 PM Do renters have rights over their rented property or can a landlord dictate that it is a mandatory GFZ (such as in an apartment), and wouldn't the same philosophy apply to a business. 720 ILCS 5/21-1 UUW:(a)(4) Carries or possesses in any vehicle or concealed on or about his person except when on his land or in his own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm, except that this subsection (a) (4) does not apply to or affect transportation of weapons that meet one of the following conditions...(goes on with the broken down, in a case yada, yada) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:14 PM Author Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:14 PM The business in question was posted, but is no longer posted. I thanked her for removing the signs. She stated she is pro-carry, but never really said why she posted the signs. I wanted to keep it friendly so I didn't push it. If she reposts I'll dig deeper. I did thank her by getting some biscuits and gravy. Yum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mqqn Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:18 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:18 PM The owner does not need a concealed carry permit to carry in his own business. Therefor, he can prohibit CCL holders from carrying and still carry in his own business regardless of the signage. That is; no pun intended, his business. I would also say that if the business is leasing the space and does not own the building, they still have the same rights inside that business and the wishes of the owner of the building hold no force of law. The business might get upside down on their lease agreement, and if there was a no-guns clause in the lease for sure there would be trouble. Too many questions and possibilities to go into every possible scenario, but in general, the business owner has the right to carry in his/her business. best mqqn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:22 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:22 PM The owner does not need a concealed carry permit to carry in his own business. Therefor, he can prohibit CCL holders from carrying and still carry in his own business regardless of the signage. That is; no pun intended, his business. I would also say that if the business is leasing the space and does not own the building, they still have the same rights inside that business and the wishes of the owner of the building hold no force of law. The business might get upside down on their lease agreement, and if there was a no-guns clause in the lease for sure there would be trouble. Too many questions and possibilities to go into every possible scenario, but in general, the business owner has the right to carry in his/her business. best mqqn That's the way I see it, just like a landlord can put it in a lease agreement (for an apartment) that you will not have guns on property, the same would apply to the business world. Unless you signed a legal document stating otherwise, you are allowed to carry inside your place. If you go into a common area, that isn't your place of business and would therefore default back to the property owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:22 PM Author Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:22 PM I can see that argument mqqn. Would you think differently if she had a permit? (IDK if she does or not). Are you then carrying under permit or the fixed place of business exemption? IDK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobapunk Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:36 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:36 PM I don't think it is a problem for an owner to carry when he restricts others (other than my feelings being hurt). If you own the property, you don't need a FCCL to carry anyhow. I try and find those exemptions. That is true, under UUA. However, if the property/business owner is a licensee under the FCCA, there is no such exemption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobapunk Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:38 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:38 PM Do renters have rights over their rented property or can a landlord dictate that it is a mandatory GFZ (such as in an apartment), and wouldn't the same philosophy apply to a business. 720 ILCS 5/21-1 UUW:(a)(4) Carries or possesses in any vehicle or concealed on or about his person except when on his land or in his own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm, except that this subsection (a) (4) does not apply to or affect transportation of weapons that meet one of the following conditions...(goes on with the broken down, in a case yada, yada) This has absolutely nothing to do with CCL holders and/or the FCCA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:38 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:38 PM This is a section 10(g) exception. (g) A licensee shall possess a license at all times thelicensee carries a concealed firearm except: (1) when the licensee is carrying or possessing a concealed firearm on his or her land or in his or her abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission; (2) when the person is authorized to carry a firearm under Section 24-2 of the Criminal Code of 2012, except subsection (a-5) of that Section; or (3) when the handgun is broken down in a non-functioning state, is not immediately accessible, or is unloaded and enclosed in a case. Edited for fat finger. (Thanks mbrich) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:45 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:45 PM Do renters have rights over their rented property or can a landlord dictate that it is a mandatory GFZ (such as in an apartment), and wouldn't the same philosophy apply to a business. 720 ILCS 5/21-1 UUW:(a)(4) Carries or possesses in any vehicle or concealed on or about his person except when on his land or in his own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm, except that this subsection (a) (4) does not apply to or affect transportation of weapons that meet one of the following conditions...(goes on with the broken down, in a case yada, yada) This has absolutely nothing to do with CCL holders and/or the FCCA. I am well aware of that, that is why I posted it. It is related back to the previous post I posted. I don't think it is a problem for an owner to carry when he restricts others (other than my feelings being hurt). If you own the property, you don't need a FCCL to carry anyhow. I try and find those exemptions. That was the exemption I was looking for. I don't believe that one law will completely negate rights given to you by another law. Not worth the fight over it. Interpret away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:48 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:48 PM This is a section 20(g) exception. (g) A licensee shall possess a license at all times the licensee carries a concealed firearm except: (1) when the licensee is carrying or possessing a concealed firearm on his or her land or in his or her abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission; (2) when the person is authorized to carry a firearm under Section 24-2 of the Criminal Code of 2012, except subsection (a-5) of that Section; or (3) when the handgun is broken down in a non-functioning state, is not immediately accessible, or is unloaded and enclosed in a case. So essentially the Section 10(g) adds the exception given under UUW act. That's a good find, I overlooked that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WtJen Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:53 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:53 PM Might as well throw this in here. What if the owner of the property grants permission for another person to carry that is not the owner? That would seem legal under FOID but may not be legal under FCCL if that person given permission has a license to carry and there is official signage. If the person given permission to carry under FOID and did not have a FCCL then it would seem he would be in the clear. Or am I wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:58 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 09:58 PM They would still be an "invitee" of the owner and with their permission. I'm not sure who would call the cops, but if they did, it should be easy to avoid the ride if the owner who gave permission is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob Posted March 31, 2014 at 10:18 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 10:18 PM some of what people are suggesting might be convenient but the law says what it says. the uuw law has an exemption to specific provisions of the uuw law, but they only apply to those specific provisions of the uuw law. what if you rented some space in a school building to use as a weekend flea market (or a craft show)? it is a fixed place of business so the uuw act exemption applies but the restriction on carry at schools also applies so you still can't carry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted March 31, 2014 at 10:23 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 10:23 PM Bob, we are also talking about Section 10 of the FCCL, which essentially copied the UUW text and pasted it in the FCCL. I'm not sure you could really consider weekend space to be "fixed place of business" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobapunk Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:00 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:00 PM How is an exemption to 430 ILCS 66/10 going to help you avoid charges for violating 430 ILCS 66/65? Sent from my SGH-I747 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chislinger Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:21 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:21 PM You always had the right to carry at your own business, so the sign referring to the FCCA doesn't apply because you're not carrying under the authority of the FCCA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobapunk Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:37 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:37 PM You always had the right to carry at your own business, so the sign referring to the FCCA doesn't apply because you're not carrying under the authority of the FCCA. I do not believe that that is how the law reads. Sent from my SGH-I747 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Stu Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:37 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:37 PM I always encourage my tenants to have firearms. I don't get stupid and even mention it in the lease agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:49 PM Share Posted March 31, 2014 at 11:49 PM You always had the right to carry at your own business, so the sign referring to the FCCA doesn't apply because you're not carrying under the authority of the FCCA.I do not believe that that is how the law reads. Sent from my SGH-I747 using Tapatalk So you are saying the following scenario is the law:You are a business owner -- You don't have a CCL -- You post ISP sign at your business -- You can legally carry because UUW gives you that right and FCCL doesn't apply to you since you have no license. You are a business owner -- You DO have a CCL -- You post ISP sign at your business -- You CANNOT legally carry because FCCL restricts you since you have a license (doesn't matter that you own the joint). Do I have that right? I don't agree. I don't think that the law actually takes your rights away from you. I do however think that the law needs clarification (in all areas), as it is about a clear as mud, but in this instance, I'll stick to what I believe the law reads. It's not something I plan to argue. I'm not going to change your mind nor do I have any desire to. That's the crazy part of Law. We all have our own interpretations, and even judges and regular folks who sit in the jury. They will interpret it and have their say. Then it gets appealed and up the latter it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangrel Posted April 1, 2014 at 12:03 AM Share Posted April 1, 2014 at 12:03 AM I don't think it is a problem for an owner to carry when he restricts others (other than my feelings being hurt). If you own the property, you don't need a FCCL to carry anyhow. I try and find those exemptions. That is true, under UUA. However, if the property/business owner is a licensee under the FCCA, there is no such exemption.This again? The FCCA amended the UUW/AUUW statute to provide for CCW licensing and set the rules. It did not abolish all other provisions under the FOID act. One is not either a FOID holder or a FCCL holder, one is both and can exercise his rights under either provision. If in your fixed place of business or land or abode, you can carry using any method you choose (concealed, mostly concealed, open, single point sling, etc.). By your logic, a licensee could be arrested for open carrying in your own house. Think about that and get a grip. You can be legal under the FOID Act OR you can be legal under under the FCCA at any given time. You do not need to be in compliance with both at all times. Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob Posted April 1, 2014 at 12:27 AM Share Posted April 1, 2014 at 12:27 AM Bob, we are also talking about Section 10 of the FCCL, which essentially copied the UUW text and pasted it in the FCCL. I'm not sure you could really consider weekend space to be "fixed place of business"look closely. The section quoted only allows you to carry as a licensee under those conditions without having the license on your person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrich Posted April 1, 2014 at 12:31 AM Share Posted April 1, 2014 at 12:31 AM Bob, we are also talking about Section 10 of the FCCL, which essentially copied the UUW text and pasted it in the FCCL. I'm not sure you could really consider weekend space to be "fixed place of business"look closely. The section quoted only allows you to carry as a licensee under those conditions without having the license on your person. Oh, I see what you are saying. I will however, stand by my comment, that I would still have the right in my fixed place of business, (but not a weekend get up at the school) based on my comment in post 27 above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.