Told to leave the Court at King of Prussia for OCing MY KIRPAN!

[King 5.45]

At 4:10 pm this afternoon, 7 June 2008, I was approached by a mall security guard named Loscalzo, employed by IPC International, at the Court at King of Prussia.

I was standing outside the entrance to the rest rooms on the second level, mid-mall, having just dropped my younger son off at Borders Books so that he could spend some birthday money. My wife had entered the ladies' room.

When we got there, the guard was standing on the bridge linking the two walkways on the second level, directly in front of the entrance to the aforementioned access corridor.

Before we get any further, let me break down the idea of a kirpan. It's a religiously significant item, one of five that I must carry with me as a Sikh. People can be a bit apprehensive, as it is a bladed object. Usually, I carry a small one that has a blade of about four inches, tops, but today I had decided to carry the larger, more ornamental one, with a blade of seven inches and a grip of five.

We carry it to remind us that we have a duty to defend those who cannot defend themselves, and to provide a means to this end, should it be necessary. We also carry it to remind us to firmly divide the world between that which is illusion, and that which is demonstrably part of God's physical construct. Lastly, we use it in our temples to bless our version of the host, as it were.

Usually I carry the kirpan openly, because I've found that it's easier to wear it so that it doesn't present an inexplicable bulge. Explaining what it is is easier than explaining the bulge to someone who is suspicious -- I figure I've avoided a few dozen Terry frisks in my time because of this. Also, since I have other bulges, it's just easier -- and safer.

At any rate, the guard walked away right after we got there, and came back a few minutes later. He walked up to me directly and said, "Is that a weapon?" Sikhs don't consider the kirpan a weapon at all -- the notion is offensive to us that it is a weapon. We're not supposed to use it as such , but rather, in the last resort for self-defense and defense of others, never for offensive purposes. He further stated that such a large object was going to make people nervous and fearful. Apparently, though, he was the only one so affected.

I told him that it was a part of my religion, and that it was called a kirpan. He told me that the mall expressly forbids the open carry of weapons. So, I explained to him, as I did to you above, that I choose to carry it openly, and why. Moreover, on such a nasty, hot day, I'd rather not sweat all over it -- it's a rather nice one and a bit special to me.

I then showed him that I was also carrying two pocketknives clipped to my front pockets, in an open fashion, to which he responded that concealed carry of weapons was okay. Thinking that I might make him understand that he wasn't dealing with a Joe Felon type, I showed him my LTCF, to which he responded that he, too, had a permit. I mean, WTH, if you're carrying something like that legally, what's the chances that you're going to be an issue with something considerably less lethal?

At this point he rather abruptly stated that he was going to call his superiors elsewhere and get a decision from them. He trotted off, and out came the missus.

A few minutes later, he came back, and told me that he had called his supervisors, off-site, explained the religious nature of the object, and that they had told him that, in no uncertain terms, I was to leave the premises forthwith. There was no offer to go into the mens' room and uncomfortably slide it under my shirt, or any other accommodation made towards me.

I was persona non grata so long as I remained with the kirpan, and no clarification was made towards me that I could return at another time carrying such a large kirpan, even if somehow concealed. Moreover, I was not instructed if I was similarly unwelcome carrying a smaller one.

Although I didn't formally identify myself, I'm quite sure that I'm on video tape at this point. I don't tend to deal with situations like this by pushing the envelope, but at this point I'm a bit outraged, because the only thing that is obvious to me that me and my kirpan are unwelcome. And no, there is no written declaration of policy on the entrance to the mall area.

To carry the kirpan is the essence of Sikhi, my religion:

"To be a Sikh is to wear a Kirpan - it is that simple." - Judge J. Painter of the Court of Appeals, Hamilton County, Ohio

What the guard saw:

[XD45]

if your religion is how you say it is i'd think you could sue the f*ck out of them

[PisnNapalm]

if your religion is how you say it is i'd think you could sue the f*ck out of them

Ummm.... No. He was on private property and asked to leave. The reason why doesn't much matter. I think it's BS but it's no different than asking someone to leave because they are OCing a firearm.

EDIT:: I'm curious. What religion do you practice? I've seen a kirpan before but never knew what it was for.

[greasy]

if your religion is how you say it is i'd think you could sue the f*ck out of them

This is probably true. Probably unnecessary though. If anything, write a letter to higher management of KOP explaining the situation. They might want to have a little chat with the security company...

I'm sorry that you had that dealing. It is one thing when it has to do with a firearm, but it is completely different when the object is not carried to serve as a weapon. It would be like me walking in there with my work belt on, and getting kicked out for having a knife (utility knife)... minus the religious significance.


Edit: pisnnapalm- If I am not mistaken, Sikhism is a religion of its own.

[TonyF]

The situation as you describe it, a man with his son and wife, it doesn't strike me as cause for concern, the weapon notwithstanding. In a similar thread I gave allot of credit to Mall security for approaching folks OC'ing cuz I think it takes allot of guts.

But in your case, it seems to me that for the most part, Mall security work must be quite boring to "intervene" in a "husband / wife / child" scenario. IOW, exercising judgment seems lacking.

[TonyF]

What the guard saw:

That is going to get people's attention.

[King 5.45]

Ummm.... No. He was on private property and asked to leave. The reason why doesn't much matter. I think it's BS but it's no different than asking someone to leave because they are OCing a firearm.

EDIT:: I'm curious. What religion do you practice? I've seen a kirpan before but never knew what it was for.

I'm a Sikh: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhism

Harimandir Sahib, our main temple:

[gnbrotz]

Ummm.... No. He was on private property and asked to leave. The reason why doesn't much matter.

My gut reaction is to agree with you, but does that apply to 'protected classes' of people? Clearly, carrying a firearm has no religious connection, and does not trump the property owner's rights. There are certain things that are not allowable as conditions for exclusion. Race and religion are the first two that come to mind. Try asking a patron to leave your establishment because of their skin color, or because they're wearing a Star of David.

I absolutely feel for the OP and will watch this thread unfold with great interest, as it is an issue that seems quite unique in nature.

[King 5.45]

I'm off for a bit. I'll rejoin the discussion and answer any questions as well as I can.

What gets me, and us, is that our religion states that our lives are forfeit, as initiated Sikhs, in the presence of danger to others. What is seen as threatening is actually a symbol of our resolve to serve, even unto death, aiding others and protecting them from harm. We aren't all perfect supermen, but we try.

[Philbert]

Ummm.... No. He was on private property and asked to leave. The reason why doesn't much matter. I think it's BS but it's no different than asking someone to leave because they are OCing a firearm.

EDIT:: I'm curious. What religion do you practice? I've seen a kirpan before but never knew what it was for.

Hmm, perhaps. However, the fact that it is tied to religion complicates matters. You can ask people to leave if they are wearing an Eagles jersey, but if you ask them to leave because they are wearing a Sikh turban, or a Jewish skull cap? That's a different ball game. I'm not up to speed with PA's laws here but I wouldn't be quick to assume that "the reason doesn't much matter". If you were refusing service to black people or women the reason probably would matter.