Originally Posted by LittleRedToyota
not according to PA statutory law. all of the various forms of trespassing in the statutes require that the person know he is not allowed to be there in order to be trespassing. if land is not posted, you may not be able to prove the person knew he was not allowed to be there.
And where does the law say one can be on that land that they dont own? 2000 years of common law(Castle Doctrine) and court rulings says you are trespassing when you go on lands that isn't yours. Dont confuse trespassing with the statutory simple/defiant/criminal trespassing
please cite the section of law that makes this so...especially in the case of a business that is generally open to the public (as that is what is really at issue here).
There is no specific section of law, just thousands of years of people being able to regulate what is allowed on their land.
agreed...assuming that "fair warning" fulfills the requirements outlined in section 3503(b). the question is...does a no guns sign, when posted on property that is generally open to the public, fulfill those requirements?
it would if any other sign is allowed to regulate access, activities, time you're allowed there, who is allowed there - which we all know that a landowner can do such.
it shouldn't fall on common/case law. rather, the statutory state law posted above should be applied. how can you be convicted of something that is not defined as a crime in statutory law?
I think that one you got confused with.. The defiant trespass is a statutory state crime, the common/case law would state the posting requirements as specified in 3503(b)(ii). State law lacks how signs should be posted as in the bolden section I quote "(ii) posting in a manner prescribed by law or reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders;" , the local/counties could elect to regulate the manner.. If they lack such regulations - it falls to common/case law and what is "commonly accepted" in the manner in which the signs should be posted
anyone ever appeal any of this to a state court?
That I dont know, I do know the guy that ran into one of our fence post with a snowmobile in the early/mid 80's and died - not only did the family lose the civil case, but his son or daughter that was passenger on the snowmobile with him got cited.
also, all of your examples seem to be related to non-commercial property that is not generally open to the public. the "no-guns" sign issue, on the other hand, applies to commercial property that is generally open to the public. so, even if you want to fall back local-level case law, this is apples and oranges.
Commercial is just as private as my front yard. Lands and real estate are either private or they are public. Under private properties there are the systems of explicit and implied consents for permission to be on that land. If one opens a business to sell shoes, you have implied consent to be there to buy shoes. However if you start picketing on their lands you are violating that implied consent - thus trespassing(not the statutory trespass, the common law trespass). One also has implied consent to walk up to someone's front door and knock so long as you follow an existing path. If there is a sign saying against it - you no longer have implied consent. If there is no implied consent, and if you lack explicit consent - you are trespassing.
I deal with trespass, property rights, Right of Ways, easements daily as a part of my job(outside plant engineer - placing poles, anchors, cables, etc). Windstream, ALLTEL, Verizon, Bell Atlantic, and several other companies have spent countless dollars on keeping me and the other engineers apprised of such laws and such. I can tell you with certainty that what I've explain is correct. I can also tell you that those who place garage and yard sale signs on utility poles are trespassing too even if the pole is in public right-of-way.
i'm not saying you are not right...you may be. i don't think anyone knows. but i still have not seen a compelling argument saying you definitely can be convicted of trespass simply for ignoring a no-guns sign. i have also not seen a compelling argument saying you definitely cannot be.
just call up your local magistrate, judge or DA to see if anyone has been cited for violating any other type of conditional posting if you need proof... easy examples are:
no hunting
no turning
employees only
no parking
no trucks
etc..
etc..
The key thing is conditional postings, not "no guns" specifically. Once established that one can regulate, any action or activity can be so long as it doesn't violate law.
|