Used to be the official (legal) looking, square sign - black letters on white. Now it's about 6" off the ground, stretched out in only two rows, with a yellow background.

I practically missed it walking in the other day for son's therapy. Wasn't asked to leave because I carry CONCEALED.

This is why we need to look at reforming the posting laws. Posting have to be between 4' and 6' (vertically).

Why would you want to change this? It requires the signs to be at eye level, not hidden in the shrubbry or on top of the doorway. Additionally, the sign has to be "conspicious" and "readily visible." The burden is on the prosecutor as to every one of these elements of the offense. Why would you want to lessen that burden?

I have to agree with KimberMan. I am new to the carry issue and "gun politics" (even though I've been around firearms all my life).
I often think that concealed gun carriers are often looking for a fight when discression might serve better in the long run. It seems like a lot of battles have been won - not to say there aren't many important issues to address going forward. But as someone who has benefited from the work of those who initiated and fought early in the game I think we need to pick and choose our battles. It's important to consider some of the possible long term effects of our actions.

I concur too with the K-man. Signage to me is a non-issue. Given the penalty for walking through the sign, it just does not light any activist fires under me.

Sure, I would prefer all business to have a "Welome Permit Holders" sign, but....I easily can live with the current law and would not want to see it debated and politicized to our detriment. I guess that puts me in the "cautiously optimistic about our law" category.

I agree with "kimberMan" on the posting. MN has one of the best posting laws I've seen written. It allows a business to "feel good" by posting a sign. The law specifically states the sign location, the specific words required on the sign, the lettering required and the color of the letters and background.

After all that, you still must be specifically notified to leave because you carry and then refuse to leave. If you refuse, the first offense is a petty misdemeaner. Will any prosicuter want to spend any time proving all the above for a petty misdemeaner? I do not know of anyone that has yet received a citation for violating the posting.

The statute also specifically states the handgun cannot be confiscated.

Carry at any business you want. If notified to leave, leave. No problem. Do business elsewhere. If it is your place of employment, they can make up the rules they want since MN is an "at will" employment state.

I use the "No Guns = No $" cards I carry and do business elsewhere. (Although I do have a problem with my cancer treatments at the Mayo Clinic which is posted. Don't know what to do about that.)

By opening up the posting to revision in the legislature, there is a good chance we may be worse off.

Let's work on the reciprosity first outside the legislature.

I'm somewhere in between. I don't have any problem -- at all -- with people straightening out government entities that post unlawfully, and am largely neutral on the issue of the malls (like Joe, I'd like to embarrass the MoA's ownership on their own hypocrisy), but when it comes to private stores, while I'd like to encourage them to take the silly signs down, I think it needs to be done very carefully.

I do have a case in point, but if I talk about it publicly, I'll be screwing up the having-done-it-carefully part. Ask me about it in person some time.

Was at Mayo on Monday and Tuesday for similar reason which necessitated my missing the group hug at Hamline. Saw signs, ignored same. One doctor saw the P-12 and asked, "is that a gun?" I replied, yes, do you have a problem with that?. He said, "not in the least". Later a technician asked if " i always carried." My reply was, not in the MRI machine.

Other than that it was a long but uneventful two days.

I skimmed replies, since what I said was mistaken.

I meant, there needs to be accountablility for posting. If this place posted at ground level, then permit holders should be able to fully ignore postings and not be asked to leave.

I love how specific the posting section is worded. But it amounts to nothing if sign/no sign they can ask us to leave. Might as well have no posting requirements.

But, a private business can ask a person to leave for any* reason. So, if there is no sign, and the business later somehow discerns that you are carrying, they can still ask you to leave.

*unless that reason is statutorily discrimination; i.e., you cannot ask a person to leave because we do not allow "your kind" in the store etc.

So, the signs just don't get me too excited one way or the other.