Carrying Guns

[bcla]

If there is no other criminal act, it's not trespassing.

Again - depends on the state. I can point to at least one where the law states that simply violating a posted condition for entry is enough to be considered trespassing, without an explicit request to leave the premises. I don't imagine that it gets prosecuted on those grounds much. However, I'd think someone with a CCW permit carrying at a concert might be more likely to be prosecuted than someone who sneaks food into a venue where outside food is generally not allowed by policy.

 

[Hikergirl]

I think there are people out there who look around and see what is going on and feel they need to carry wherever they go. They don't see any difference between WDW or some dark alley in the bad part of town.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

I don't understand it either. I do, however, understand some wanting their gun on the drive to Orlando. Our drive is 10 hours so we drive straight through and dh doesn't take his gun. But as a truck driver, dh does carry normally when he is on the road so if we were stopping in some more unknown area, he may be inclined to take his gun.

As I read through the thread, I started to see why there would be guns around the property to begin with. It's like if cellphones weren't allowed in the park (note: I know guns aren't phones). I carry my cellphone everywhere, so I have to leave it in my room or car or something. Some people carry their gun with them 24/7. So of course they have it on them when they get to their hotel. Although I'm not sure how you get on a plane. Maybe it's packed?

 

[LYSE]

As I read through the thread, I started to see why there would be guns around the property to begin with. It's like if cellphones weren't allowed in the park (note: I know guns aren't phones). I carry my cellphone everywhere, so I have to leave it in my room or car or something. Some people carry their gun with them 24/7. So of course they have it on them when they get to their hotel. Although I'm not sure how you get on a plane. Maybe it's packed?

Yup you get it.

You can check a firearm, you just follow TSA and airline rules but it's pretty straightforward.

 

[bcla]

Also, there are specific locations listed in my state's law where carrying a firearms is prohibited, and you are subject to arrest for carrying a weapon, but these are locations like municipal, county, state and Federal facilities, and the secure areas of airports.

Someone posted the part of Florida law that indicates that having a dangerous weapon (where a firearm is specifically mentioned) in the commission of trespassing can add a felony enhancement. Having it may not specifically be a crime, but the gist seems to be that someone carrying may be asked to leave on that basis and that it's a far more serious offense to refuse to leave compared to (let's say) someone asked to leave for being disruptive.

 

[bcla]

As I read through the thread, I started to see why there would be guns around the property to begin with. It's like if cellphones weren't allowed in the park (note: I know guns aren't phones). I carry my cellphone everywhere, so I have to leave it in my room or car or something. Some people carry their gun with them 24/7. So of course they have it on them when they get to their hotel. Although I'm not sure how you get on a plane. Maybe it's packed?

I get it. For some people, having that firearm everywhere is a lifestyle. I've literally heard of people who say that they can't imagine going anywhere without a gun.

Kind of reminds me of the requirement of baptized Sikh males to carry a kirpan at all times. They don't necessarily consider it to be a weapon though, but more as a ceremonial device as a show of their faith.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

As I read through the thread, I started to see why there would be guns around the property to begin with. It's like if cellphones weren't allowed in the park (note: I know guns aren't phones). I carry my cellphone everywhere, so I have to leave it in my room or car or something. Some people carry their gun with them 24/7. So of course they have it on them when they get to their hotel. Although I'm not sure how you get on a plane. Maybe it's packed?

Yes, checked baggage.

The other possibility is someone who drives to FL by way of sketchy neighborhoods. They feel they need their gun somewhere along the trip, but not necessarily at Disney. But, once there, what to do with it? In a car is a terrible place to store it, so they choose to keep it with them.

Just to clarify, I don't agree. But, I can see where someone might decide to do that.

 

[Magpie]

This thread is reminding me of the 2012 story of Walt Wawra, a police officer from Kalamazoo Michigan, who described feeling "threatened" and lamented not being allowed to bring his gun into Canada, when a pair of young men approached him and his wife on a hiking trail and asked if they'd been to the Calgary Stampede.

http://nationalpost.com/news/walt-wawra

My husband used to get chosen for a "random" pat down every time we tried to enter a Disney park. Then, one day I suggested he start tucking his shirt into his shorts, and they stopped "randomly" choosing him. I'm quite certain they were looking for a concealed firearm. After all, as a middle aged white male in loose-fitting golf shirt and khakis, he does rather fit the profile of someone who might consider their gun to be an integral part of their lifestyle. Like Walt Wawra.

 

[Hikergirl]

This thread is reminding me of the 2012 story of Walt Wawra, a police officer from Kalamazoo Michigan, who described feeling "threatened" and lamented not being allowed to bring his gun into Canada, when a pair of young men approached him and his wife on a hiking trail and asked if they'd been to the Calgary Stampede.

http://nationalpost.com/news/walt-wawra

My husband used to get chosen for a "random" pat down every time we tried to enter a Disney park. Then, one day I suggested he start tucking his shirt into his shorts, and they stopped "randomly" choosing him. I'm quite certain they were looking for a concealed firearm. After all, as a middle aged white male in loose-fitting golf shirt and khakis, he does rather fit the profile of someone who might consider their gun to be an integral part of their lifestyle. Like Walt Wawra.

He is a cop from Kalamazoo MI so his reaction doesn't surprise me.

 

[Jdbsfw]

If the “bad guys” would give us a heads up as to when and where they would like to settle their hash with society, then of course some people wouldn’t feel the “need” to take a firearm to WDW, church, schools, post office or anywhere other than the range, field, or the OK Corral but that’s not how it works.....The “Boy-scout Motto” runs deep.

 

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

That's not a very safe place to keep a gun. Those safes get broken into by hotel staff all the time.

That is why some people pack their own safe.

Ideally, the owner then conceals the safe as well.

 

[bcla]

That is why some people pack their own safe.

Ideally, the owner then conceals the safe as well.

We've been dealing with a rash of gun thefts from vehicles in California. The highest profile have been from law enforcement, who apparently don't have the same requirements for gun storage as the general public. There was that notorious case of a Bureau of Land Management LE ranger having his sidearm stolen while he and his family went to a restaurant in San Francisco. Several police officers have had theirs stolen. UC Berkeley's chief of police had her's stolen from the trunk of her SUV while she went out jogging at a regional park. None of these cases involved a vehicle safe, which are fairly common. Some are simply bolted on, but it's possible to weld one on to make it harder to remove.

 

[bcla]

If there is no other criminal act, it's not trespassing.

Well - I looked up some more information, and it's highly dependent on the state. Some states like Texas have laws where there has to be signs conforming to specific requirements, but where entering with a firearm is an automatic criminal trespass if there's signage. Alaska supposedly has a similar law. These are certainly in contrast to the laws in those states that make it easy to get a CCW permit and where people routinely carry firearms.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.30.htm
Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY LICENSE HOLDER WITH A CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:

(1) carries a concealed handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and

(2) received notice that entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden.

(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.

(c) In this section:

(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).

(2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).

(3) "Written communication" means:

(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or

(B) a sign posted on the property that:

(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;

(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and

(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

(d) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $200, except that the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if it is shown on the trial of the offense that, after entering the property, the license holder was personally given the notice by oral communication described by Subsection (b) and subsequently failed to depart.

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.​

 

[Magpie]

He is a cop from Kalamazoo MI so his reaction doesn't surprise me.

It is, however, important that he realize that the problem wasn't his lack of a gun. It's the fact that living and working in a place where the crime index is 83 out of 100 (almost 3 times the US average) appears to have skewed his perceptions to the point where he is seeing threat where there is none.

People who can't assess danger accurately shouldn't be armed.

 

[bcla]

It is, however, important that he realize that the problem wasn't his lack of a gun. It's the fact that living and working in a place where the crime index is 83 out of 100 (almost 3 times the US average) appears to have skewed his perceptions to the point where he is seeing threat where there is none.

People who can't assess danger accurately shouldn't be armed.

I live in an area with some of the lowest crime rates in the state of California. There's been maybe one homicide in the past decade, and that was some really weird thing between a guy and his family. I've had traffic stops for stuff like a blown headlamp, and even then the local police were looking at me like I might try something crazy. Cops these days are extremely paranoid even in places where the risk of violence is demonstrably low.

 

[Hikergirl]

It is, however, important that he realize that the problem wasn't his lack of a gun. It's the fact that living and working in a place where the crime index is 83 out of 100 (almost 3 times the US average) appears to have skewed his perceptions to the point where he is seeing threat where there is none.

People who can't assess danger accurately shouldn't be armed.

I don't totally disagree, it isn't like he tackled the men who asked him.
He felt uneasy, he didn't act on that feeling. He feels more secure with his gun, which as a PO I can understand why he feels that way. That doesn't mean he would over react or give in to his feelings and make a huge mistake.

 

[Magpie]

I don't totally disagree, it isn't like he tackled the men who asked him.
He felt uneasy, he didn't act on that feeling. He feels more secure with his gun, which as a PO I can understand why he feels that way. That doesn't mean he would over react or give in to his feelings and make a huge mistake.

Guns are not security blankets, and should never be used as such.

In Canada, pointing a gun at someone, even without an accompanying verbal threat, is considered criminal assault (http://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/elements-of-assault.html). From what Wawra writes, that is exactly what he thinks he should have been able to do to those two young men. And he would consider assaulting them in this way to be completely justified, simply because they spoke to him and startled him!

I would hate to have anyone's personal safety riding on this man's ability to not make a "huge mistake" while vacationing in Alberta. He's entirely too jumpy.

 

[Hikergirl]

Guns are not security blankets, and should never be used as such.

In Canada, pointing a gun at someone, even without an accompanying verbal threat, is considered criminal assault (http://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/elements-of-assault.html). From what Wawra writes, that is exactly what he thinks he should have been able to do to those two young men. And he would consider assaulting them in this way to be completely justified, simply because they spoke to him and startled him!

I would hate to have anyone's personal safety riding on this man's ability to not make a "huge mistake" while vacationing in Alberta. He's entirely too jumpy.

I didn't read where he said he wanted to pull his gun out, if that is what he said then I do agree with you.
In general I expect police officers to view the world differently than the rest of us. I expect them to have instincts about the intentions of others because of the things they have gone through in their profession. I also expect PO to be able to control their actions, and the majority of them do. I won't judge them all based on the actions of a few. I also am not going to judge this person based on what I think he may have done. I don't know what he may have done.
YMMV and that is OK. I think you and I read his letter differently.

 

[Magpie]

I didn't read where he said he wanted to pull his gun out, if that is what he said then I do agree with you.
In general I expect police officers to view the world differently than the rest of us. I expect them to have instincts about the intentions of others because of the things they have gone through in their profession. I also expect PO to be able to control their actions, and the majority of them do. I won't judge them all based on the actions of a few. I also am not going to judge this person based on what I think he may have done. I don't know what he may have done.
YMMV and that is OK.

The thing is, when he's in Canada, no one knows he's a police officer. He has no authority. He's a private citizen and expected to act as such.

For the record, this is what he wrote:

"I recently visited Calgary from Michigan. As a police officer for 20 years, it feels strange not to carry my off-duty hand-gun. Many would say I have no need to carry one in Canada. Yet the police cannot protect everyone all the time. A man should be allowed to protect himself if the need arises. The need arose in a theatre in Aurora, Colo., as well as a college campus in Canada. Recently, while out for a walk in Nose Hill Park, in broad daylight on a paved trail, two young men approached my wife and me. The men stepped in front of us, then said in a very aggressive tone: “Been to the Stampede yet?” We ignored them. The two moved closer, repeating: “Hey, you been to the Stampede yet? I quickly moved between these two and my wife, replying, “Gentlemen, I have no need to talk with you, goodbye.” They looked bewildered, and we then walked past them. I speculate they did not have good intentions when they approached in such an aggressive, disrespectful and menacing manner. I thank the Lord Jesus Christ they did not pull a weapon of some sort, but rather concluded it was in their best interest to leave us alone. Would we not expect a uniformed officer to pull his or her weapon to intercede in a life-or-death encounter to protect self, or another? Why then should the expectation be lower for a citizen of Canada or a visitor? Wait, I know – it’s because in Canada, only the criminals and the police carry handguns. Walt Wawra, Kalamazoo, Mich."

I interpreted this to mean he would have pulled a weapon, if he'd had one. You're quite right, though, that may not necessarily be the case. Maybe he would have felt so secure, just having that weapon on him, that he wouldn't have felt the need to pull it. Maybe that feeling of security would even have led him to perceive the young men in a friendlier manner.

However, as I said before, I rather disapprove of using a gun as a security blanket. So, that scenario isn't really much better, imo.

 

[robinb]

The thing is, when he's in Canada, no one knows he's a police officer. He has no authority. He's a private citizen and expected to act as such.

For the record, this is what he wrote:

"I recently visited Calgary from Michigan. As a police officer for 20 years, it feels strange not to carry my off-duty hand-gun. Many would say I have no need to carry one in Canada. Yet the police cannot protect everyone all the time. A man should be allowed to protect himself if the need arises. The need arose in a theatre in Aurora, Colo., as well as a college campus in Canada. Recently, while out for a walk in Nose Hill Park, in broad daylight on a paved trail, two young men approached my wife and me. The men stepped in front of us, then said in a very aggressive tone: “Been to the Stampede yet?” We ignored them. The two moved closer, repeating: “Hey, you been to the Stampede yet? I quickly moved between these two and my wife, replying, “Gentlemen, I have no need to talk with you, goodbye.” They looked bewildered, and we then walked past them. I speculate they did not have good intentions when they approached in such an aggressive, disrespectful and menacing manner. I thank the Lord Jesus Christ they did not pull a weapon of some sort, but rather concluded it was in their best interest to leave us alone. Would we not expect a uniformed officer to pull his or her weapon to intercede in a life-or-death encounter to protect self, or another? Why then should the expectation be lower for a citizen of Canada or a visitor? Wait, I know – it’s because in Canada, only the criminals and the police carry handguns. Walt Wawra, Kalamazoo, Mich."

I interpreted this to mean he would have pulled a weapon, if he'd had one. You're quite right, though, that may not necessarily be the case. Maybe he would have felt so secure, just having that weapon on him, that he wouldn't have felt the need to pull it. Maybe that feeling of security would even have led him to perceive the young men in a friendlier manner.

However, as I said before, I rather disapprove of using a gun as a security blanket. So, that scenario isn't really much better, imo.

Apparently, “Been to the Stampede yet?” is Canadian for "Give me all your money!". Who knew?