Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Sat Apr 27, 2024 9:56 am

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Becker Community Center 
Author Message
 Post subject: Becker Community Center
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:14 pm 
Journeyman Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:05 pm
Posts: 92
Location: Becker
While taking my kids to swimming lessons the other day, I noticed a "Bans Guns" sign while entering the Becker Community Center. I have been in and out of there a number of times and this was the first time I noticed it. Maybe because it was at the very far right of 4 double doors. I did some searching on the forum and found some threads regarding postings in Eagan and Bloomington in the distant past, but it left me with some confusion.

Statute 624.714 Subd. 17 states:
Quote:
Subd. 17. Posting; trespass. (a) A person carrying a firearm on or about his or her person
or clothes under a permit or otherwise who remains at a private establishment knowing that the
operator of the establishment or its agent has made a reasonable request that firearms not be
brought into the establishment may be ordered to leave the premises. A person who fails to
leave when so requested is guilty of a petty misdemeanor. The fine for a first offense must not
exceed $25. Notwithstanding section 609.531, a firearm carried in violation of this subdivision
is not subject to forfeiture.
(b) As used in this subdivision, the terms in this paragraph have the meanings given.
(1) "Reasonable request" means a request made under the following circumstances:
(i) the requester has prominently posted a conspicuous sign at every entrance to the
establishment containing the following language: "(INDICATE IDENTITY OF OPERATOR)
BANS GUNS IN THESE PREMISES."; or
(ii) the requester or the requester's agent personally informs the person that guns are
prohibited in the premises and demands compliance.
(2) "Prominently" means readily visible and within four feet laterally of the entrance with the
bottom of the sign at a height of four to six feet above the floor.
(3) "Conspicuous" means lettering in black arial typeface at least 1-1/2 inches in height
against a bright contrasting background that is at least 187 square inches in area.
(4) "Private establishment" means a building, structure, or portion thereof that is owned,
leased, controlled, or operated by a nongovernmental entity for a nongovernmental purpose.
(c) The owner or operator of a private establishment may not prohibit the lawful carry or
possession of firearms in a parking facility or parking area.
(d) This subdivision does not apply to private residences. The lawful possessor of a private
residence may prohibit firearms, and provide notice thereof, in any lawful manner.
(e) A landlord may not restrict the lawful carry or possession of firearms by tenants or
their guests.
(f) Notwithstanding any inconsistent provisions in section 609.605, this subdivision sets
forth the exclusive criteria to notify a permit holder when otherwise lawful firearm possession is
not allowed in a private establishment and sets forth the exclusive penalty for such activity.
(g) This subdivision does not apply to:
(1) an active licensed peace officer; or
(2) a security guard acting in the course and scope of employment.


Based on item (4), I have highlighted the area of interest, I interpret that a city owned and operated community center can not be posted. Is that a correct assumption?

I did ask the lady working behind the counter about the sign. She knew about the sign and said it had been up for "a long time". However, when I asked her, "Why" it was there, she did not know and referred me to management who was of course not there.

What would be my best course of action for inquiring about the sign and asking for it to be removed?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:50 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
You are right: the city can't post that sign. See Subd. 23:
Quote:
Subd. 23. Exclusivity. This section sets forth the complete and exclusive criteria and
procedures for the issuance of permits to carry and establishes their nature and scope. No sheriff,
police chief, governmental unit, government official, government employee, or other person or
body acting under color of law or governmental authority may change, modify, or supplement
these criteria or procedures, or limit the exercise of a permit to carry.


If you search here, you'll find examples of previous letters. If you want an organization to take the lead, MADFI has a pretty good record of politely correcting "mistaken" bureaucrats.

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 12:47 pm 
Journeyman Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:05 pm
Posts: 92
Location: Becker
I sent the following email to a city council member that I know:

Quote:
Hi Gregg,

My name is <montana_redneck>. I've talked to you a few times at school and dance class. I have daughters XXX and YYY. I think XXX and <your daughter> were in the same class this year. Hopefully that gives you a little reference of who I am.

While taking the girls to swimming lessons at the Becker Community Center last week, I noticed a sign to the far right-hand side of the inside doors which stated "Becker Community Center Bans guns in these premises". I had never noticed this sign before, but when I inquired at the desk, the lady said it has been up for a long time. Do you know the history of when and why it was posted?

Since you are on the city council and on the community center advisory committee, I thought I would email you first. I believe that the sign mentioned above is not in compliance with MN Statute 624.714, which can be found here: https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/sta ... id=624.714

Subd. 17 (4) states:

(4) "Private establishment" means a building, structure, or portion thereof that is owned,
leased, controlled, or operated by a nongovernmental entity for a nongovernmental purpose.


Since the Becker Community Center is operated by the City, I do not think that it would be considered a "private establishment".

Also, Subd. 23 says:

Subd. 23. Exclusivity. This section sets forth the complete and exclusive criteria and
procedures for the issuance of permits to carry and establishes their nature and scope. No sheriff,
police chief, governmental unit, government official, government employee, or other person or
body acting under color of law or governmental authority may change, modify, or supplement
these criteria or procedures, or limit the exercise of a permit to carry.



Since it appears that the sign is not in compliance with MN Statute 624.714, I am suggesting that it be removed.
Thank you in advance for taking time to look into this matter, and please give me a call if you have any questions.


Sincerely,

<montana_redneck>
xxx-xxx-xxxx



I will wait and see what he says.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 12:55 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
Perfect. Often the soft approach works well.

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:55 pm 
Activist Extraordinaire
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 10:02 pm
Posts: 546
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Thanks for taking the lead on this, and for holding them accountable to the law.

_________________
Respectfully,
Doug

"Some Things Are Worth Fighting For"
Judas Priest


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:47 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 9:55 pm
Posts: 742
Location: Twin Cities
Andrew Rothman wrote:
Perfect. Often the soft approach works well.

And if you want to take a really soft approach, instead of saying
Quote:
I believe that the sign mentioned above is not in compliance with MN Statute 624.714, which can be found here

you can say:
Quote:
Can you confirm that this sign does not apply to permit holders? According to MN Statute 624.714, which can be found here...

You know it's being rhetorically asked. But they don't necessarily. More importantly you aren't saying, "you're wrong!"

Further, you get to see what they're made of. Their response could be anywhere from, "Yes. You're correct. The signs aren't valid we'll take them down. We're very, very sorry." to "Shove off." (or nothing at all).

I used this approach with Lakeville and my city admitted the signs at one of our parks were wrong (as well as an ordinance) and should be replaced at some point. I'm still holding my breath, but I do have it in writing that the preempted city ordinances and signs can be ignored by permit holders if the issue should ever come up.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:38 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
Different strokes and all that, but I won't ever give them an opening or excuse to ignore the issue or tell me I'm wrong (I'm never wrong... :)).

I believe in soft but decisive, with a face-saving direction for them to retreat: "I'm sure it is an oversight, but I noticed that your signs no longer comply with Minnesota law. I am sure you are as interested as I am in ensuring that the city follows the state law. May I expect that the signs will be removed by the end of the week?"

:)

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:41 am 
Journeyman Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:05 pm
Posts: 92
Location: Becker
I received a response yesterday:

Quote:
Thank you for the email, I am guessing this sign went up when the law was first introduced, If my memory serves me correctly there were a number of churches that put up signs and ultimately were forced to change once the law was clarified. I spoke with the director at the community center and he says it was there when he took over about 1.5 years ago. I will run this by our police chief for clarification and get back to you on any decisions.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:49 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 11:50 am
Posts: 348
Location: North suburbs
montana_redneck wrote:
I received a response yesterday:

Quote:
Thank you for the email, I am guessing this sign went up when the law was first introduced, If my memory serves me correctly there were a number of churches that put up signs and ultimately were forced to change once the law was clarified. I spoke with the director at the community center and he says it was there when he took over about 1.5 years ago. I will run this by our police chief for clarification and get back to you on any decisions.
Excellent. Keep us informed what happens, please!

_________________
When seconds count between life and death, the police are only minutes away.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:09 am 
Delicate Flower

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 11:20 am
Posts: 3311
Location: St. Paul, MN.
montana_redneck wrote:
I received a response yesterday:

Quote:
Thank you for the email, I am guessing this sign went up when the law was first introduced, If my memory serves me correctly there were a number of churches that put up signs and ultimately were forced to change once the law was clarified. I spoke with the director at the community center and he says it was there when he took over about 1.5 years ago. I will run this by our police chief for clarification and get back to you on any decisions.


Not a bad response............Hopefully the chief is more familiar with the statute.

_________________
http://is.gd/37LKr


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:11 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
Quote:
I will run this by our police chief for clarification


Asking a cop about the law is like asking a butcher about open heart surgery.

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:14 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:56 pm
Posts: 1109
It should be brought to the attention of the city attorney


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:03 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
JimC wrote:
It should be brought to the attention of the city attorney


...who represents the city, not the taxpayer.

Better to go to the city attorney's bosses: the city council. They answer to voters.

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:06 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 5270
Location: Minneapolis
Andrew Rothman wrote:
Asking a cop about the law is like asking a butcher about open heart surgery.


Quote:
Tommy: Hey, I'll tell you what. You can take a good look at a butcher's ass by sticking your head up there. But, wouldn't you rather to take his word for it?

Mr. Brady: What? I'm failing to make the connection here son.

Tommy: No, I mean, you can get a good look at a T-bone by sticking your head up a butcher's ass, but then..no. It's gotta be your bull.

Richard: Wow.

Tommy: Here's the deal. If I want you..

Richard: You have derailed.

Tommy: Shut up Richard.

Mr. Brady: Boy, I'm really at a loss for words here.

Tommy: Forget it, I quit, I can't do this anymore, man. My head's about to explode. My whole life sucks. I don't know what I'm doing, I don't know where I'm going. My dad just died. We just killed Bambi. I'm out here getting my ass kicked and every time I drive down the road I wanna jerk the wheel INTO A BRIDGE ABUTMENT.

_________________
I am defending myself... in favor of that!


Last edited by DeanC on Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 9:52 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 11:50 am
Posts: 348
Location: North suburbs
DeanC wrote:
Quote:
Tommy: Hey, I'll tell you what. You can take a good look at a butcher's ass by sticking your head up there. But, wouldn't you rather to take his word for it?

Mr. Brady: What? I'm failing to make the connection here son.

Tommy: No, I mean, you can get a good look at a T-bone by sticking your head up a butcher's ass, but then..no. It's gotta be your bull.

Richard: Wow.

Tommy: Here's the deal. If I want you..

Richard: You have derailed.

Tommy: Shut up Richard.

Mr. Brady: Boy, I'm really at a loss for words here.

Tommy: Forget it, I quit, I can't do this anymore, man. My head's about to explode. My whole life sucks. I don't know what I'm doing, I don't know where I'm going. My dad just died. We just killed Bambi. I'm out here getting my ass kicked and every time I drive down the road I wanna jerk the wheel INTO A BRIDGE ABUTMENT.

OK, I have to admit...I'm confused. :?

_________________
When seconds count between life and death, the police are only minutes away.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 64 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group