Is it illegal to carry at private business that has metal detectors?

[pennsy.357]

If you brought your gun into say an amusement park that has metal detectors at the entrance; is that illegal? Obvisiously the metal detectors are to prevent guns from getting pass. And there are ways to get a gun into an amusement park without being detected. But I don't think it's illegal; it's not a federal courthouse; it's a private business; the only thing I think they can do is turn you away? Thoughts?

[tl_3237]

If you brought your gun into say an amusement park that has metal detectors at the entrance; is that illegal? Obvisiously the metal detectors are to prevent guns from getting pass. And there are ways to get a gun into an amusement park without being detected. But I don't think it's illegal; it's not a federal courthouse; it's a private business; the only thing I think they can do is turn you away? Thoughts?

The only 'illegality' is potentially through the trespass law (18 Pa CSA 3503). If the property is posted 'no-firearms' then you are trespassing by ignoring that particular condition of entry. If not posted it is illegal only if you're advised that you cannot remain with the firearm and you refuse to leave.

see:
http://forum.pafoa.org/york-53/86460...u-cant-cc.html

[Steve in PA]

There are no "conditions" of trespass. You are either allowed to be there or you are not.

You can't post a sign that says "no trespassing.......except for people wearing purple", etc.

Stores with signs that say "no shoes, no shirt, no service" doesn't mean people are cited for trespassing by walking in without shoes or shirts.

[schr8er2000]

There are no "conditions" of trespass. You are either allowed to be there or you are not.

You can't post a sign that says "no trespassing.......except for people wearing purple", etc.

Stores with signs that say "no shoes, no shirt, no service" doesn't mean people are cited for trespassing by walking in without shoes or shirts.

Agreed... posting does NOT mean a thing... all they can do is ask you to leave... and THEN, if you refuse, can you be prosecuted for trespassing. If you turn and walk away there is nothing they can do to you.

BUT... knowing that a metal detector IS used, I would not even try... and take my business elsewhere if I did not want to disarm.....

[tl_3237]

There are no "conditions" of trespass. You are either allowed to be there or you are not.

You can't post a sign that says "no trespassing.......except for people wearing purple", etc.

Stores with signs that say "no shoes, no shirt, no service" doesn't mean people are cited for trespassing by walking in without shoes or shirts.

Agreed... posting does NOT mean a thing... all they can do is ask you to leave... and THEN, if you refuse, can you be prosecuted for trespassing. If you turn and walk away there is nothing they can do to you.

BUT... knowing that a metal detector IS used, I would not even try... and take my business elsewhere if I did not want to disarm.....

I disagree ... A property owner certainly can establish conditions of entry.

In the case of a business open to the public there is an implied extension of permission to the public to enter as business invitees, however, that invitation can be restricted by signage. Subject to discrimination law restrictions, the property owner can withhold that blanket permission from whomever he chooses. If a sign stating conditions of entry (ex: no-firearms sign, no bare feet, etc) is posted in a manner to reasonably come to the attention of the enterer, then entry onto the property in contravention of those conditions is without license to do so and, as a result, immediately constitutes a trespass (18 Pa CSA 3503(b)(1)(ii)) violation.

snip...

Here's the way the law works: if Costco bans guns on their premises (which they do), but they don't post signs at the door, then all they can do is ask you to leave once they see that you have a gun. If you refuse to leave, then it's defiant trespass, a criminal offense. If they post a clearly-visible "no guns" sign at the door and you come in with a gun, then you are trespassing even before they confront you.

... snip

[Steve in PA]

There are no conditions to trespass.

Signs that say "no guns........no running......no smoking.....no whatever" have nothing to do with trespass. You are not cited for trespass for running in the mall.........for smoking in a prohibited place, etc.

A place can set a "policy" in order to deal with behavior on its property but that policy doesn't equate to trespass. Yes, you can be asked to leave which falls in line with the trespass law.

[tl_3237]

There are no conditions to trespass.

Signs that say "no guns........no running......no smoking.....no whatever" have nothing to do with trespass. You are not cited for trespass for running in the mall.........for smoking in a prohibited place, etc.

A place can set a "policy" in order to deal with behavior on its property but that policy doesn't equate to trespass. Yes, you can be asked to leave which falls in line with the trespass law.

Trespass is entry in or remaining on private property where you know you have no license (permission) to do so. Along with your presence, it is the existance or non-existance of that permission which is the determining factor as to whether you are trespassing.

As the property owner I have the right to allow or exclude whomever I wish. This right is diminished somewhat for those offering a public accomondation via the anti-discrimination laws but, in general I still retain the right to set standards as to whom is allowed or prohibited from entering my business property. When my business entails on-site interfacing with customers then I have implicitly issued a business invite to said customers to enter the property, however, by establishing 'conditions of entry' I can modify or revoke that permission from a targeted subset of the public. If I specify that 'no pets' are allowed then someone, knowing of that policy, entering or remaining with a pet (non-service animal) is trespassing. Similarly a person entering or remaining with a firearm knowing my policy is 'no firearms' is trespassing.

There are several ways that 3503 allows me to notify someone as to whether they do or don't have permission to enter of remain of my property - direct notification (ex:verbal), signage and fencing. All three methods suffice to satisy the promulgation component of a trespass charge and bear only to differentiate grading of the offense.

Consider a business that bans people who possess firearms from its premises, a duly authorized agent of that business and an OCer whose firearm is obvious to all who encounter him:

1. no signs posted but after entering the OCer is approached by the agent and told that people possessing firearms are not permitted on the property. In spite of the notification that he lacks permission, the OCer remains - 'trespassing'?

2. no signs posted but the agent is outside the business (in a public area) and tells the OCer, before crossing the business threshold, that people possessing firearms are not permitted on the property. The OCer enters anyhow - 'trespassing'?

3. same as #2 but the agent, instead of addressing the OCer individually, announces to the entering crowd that people possessing firearms are not permitted on the property. Having heard the announcement the OCer enters anyhow - 'trespassing'?

4. sign posted with conditions of entry which include that people possessing firearms are not permitted on the property. The OCer reads the sign but enters anyhow - 'trespassing'?

From an on-point thread:
http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-14...ten-pafoa.html

Please stop saying this, it's not necessarily true, no matter how many times it's repeated.

If you carry a gun into a place that is posted against guns, you could arguably be prosecuted under the trespassing statute, for doing something on the property that you have been placed on notice you are without license to do.

Signs have legal weight. The signs in the parking garage that say "not responsible for lost items" have legal weight. Signs are not a legal nullity, and in the absence of case law interpreting the trespassing statute to clearly negate the "no guns" signs, we do a disservice to people by giving them the false sense of confidence that they are free to ignore these signs.

It's true that other states have specific statutes giving weight to these specific signs, and PA does not have such a law. However, that's not the same as saying that there's no operative difference between having a sign and not having a sign. You can't be prosecuted in PA under the "disobeying a no weapons sign" statute because there is none, but we do have a "trespassing" statute. A sign puts you on notice as to the terms of the permission granted to you to use the private property of another. If you go outside those terms of use, you are trespassing.
This is a legal matter, it's a legal conclusion, and you need to have a firm legal basis before telling anyone that it's safe to say "screw you" to a property owner and make him tell you face-to-face what his sign already advised you.