Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive
http://twincitiescarry.com/forum/

Posting and the law abiding Carry Permit holder
http://twincitiescarry.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12434
Page 1 of 3

Author:  PoorSSJ [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 8:52 am ]
Post subject: 

I recently took my renewal class at bills north. I decided on bills due to the fact that they advertised instruction on holster draw, and more range time. At the actual class, they let everyone vote on whether or not they wanted to do this, shooting an extra 50 rounds or more, and the majority voted to not do it, by a 7-5 margin. Talk about 5 unhappy people. What a Rip Off. I paid 100 at bills, where I could have taken the regular renewal class, with no additional shooting, for about 65 bucks

Sorry to go off topic. What I was wondering, is that at this class, we were taught that they have changed the signage laws, saying any sign saying guns are not welcome is now legal. We were also told that if you carry into a posted place you can get a trespassing ticket without being verbally told, since the sign informs you. Is this now the law?
Thanks

Author:  mrokern [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 8:55 am ]
Post subject: 

PoorSSJ wrote:
I recently took my renewal class at bills north. I decided on bills due to the fact that they advertised instruction on holster draw, and more range time. At the actual class, they let everyone vote on whether or not they wanted to do this, shooting an extra 50 rounds or more, and the majority voted to not do it, by a 7-5 margin. Talk about 5 unhappy people. What a Rip Off. I paid 100 at bills, where I could have taken the regular renewal class, with no additional shooting, for about 65 bucks

Sorry to go off topic. What I was wondering, is that at this class, we were taught that they have changed the signage laws, saying any sign saying guns are not welcome is now legal. We were also told that if you carry into a posted place you can get a trespassing ticket without being verbally told, since the sign informs you. Is this now the law?
Thanks


Who's spreading that around, and how fast can somebody yank their instructor certification? :evil:

Author:  plblark [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:20 am ]
Post subject: 

PoorSSJ wrote:
at this class, we were taught that they have changed the signage laws, saying any sign saying guns are not welcome is now legal. We were also told that if you carry into a posted place you can get a trespassing ticket without being verbally told, since the sign informs you. Is this now the law?
Thanks


Please contact your instructor and Bill's Gun Shop as well as encouraging the other students you may know to do so. Give them a chance to clean their own house. If this is indeed what the instructor actually taught, it's absolutely incorrect.

I suppose it's possible your instructor was using parody or making a comparison and the distinction was missed in his/her presentation but let Bill's know about it ASAP.

Author:  plblark [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:22 am ]
Post subject: 

The law is a tow step process:
Notification
and
Demand for compliance

You must be personally notified and they must demand compliance. The sign can serve as the former when it meets all the legal requirements on size, contrast, placement, etc ... but without the demand for compliance ("Please leave"), no crime has been committed.

I treat the signs as an indication of the business' wish that I spend my money elsewhere.

Author:  joelr [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:30 am ]
Post subject: 

plblark wrote:
PoorSSJ wrote:
at this class, we were taught that they have changed the signage laws, saying any sign saying guns are not welcome is now legal. We were also told that if you carry into a posted place you can get a trespassing ticket without being verbally told, since the sign informs you. Is this now the law?
Thanks


Please contact your instructor and Bill's Gun Shop as well as encouraging the other students you may know to do so. Give them a chance to clean their own house. If this is indeed what the instructor actually taught, it's absolutely incorrect.
I can hear a Bart Simpson Defense* off in the distance . . .

______________________
* "He didn't do it, you can't prove anything, and it won't happen again."

Author:  plblark [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:34 am ]
Post subject: 

As a hypothetical, If _I_ screwed up that badly,I'm sure MN Tactics and MADFI (as certifying organizations) want to know about it. Hell, _I_ want to know about it.

You may be correct about the likely response ...

Author:  PoorSSJ [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:45 am ]
Post subject: 

Thanks for the Info guys
I am surprised that someone teaching a class wouldn't know the laws better. My instructor was Bill Kimmel and aside from those two apparent misinterpretations of the statutes, and not giving me what I paid for (the extra range time advertised in the course description) I though he did a good job

Author:  Lenny7 [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 12:28 pm ]
Post subject: 

plblark wrote:
... but without the demand for compliance ("Please leave"), no crime has been committed.


I know you know this, but to be clear for those that don't,

"...without the demand for compliance, and a refusal to do so, no crime has been committed."

Author:  PoorSSJ [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 2:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

We were also taught that even if you refuse to go, and get a ticket, it's not a crime. It's a statute violation, which I'm assuming is true

Author:  joelr [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 2:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

PoorSSJ wrote:
We were also taught that even if you refuse to go, and get a ticket, it's not a crime. It's a statute violation, which I'm assuming is true
Yup, more or less. (More more than less.)

The problem with the Bill's presentation is that it attempts to be encyclopedic. Which is useful for some purposes -- that way, John Monson can say, if ever challenged, "well, of course that [whatever that is] was covered. It's on line 187 of slide 243, right between line 186 and 188."

The problem is, though, that the level of detail guarantees that every instructor using it is going to skim over most of it, and unless they know exactly what they can and can't skip, they're going to, from time to time, miss something significant. The standard "rules" for a Powerpoint weren't handed down by edict; they're a description of what will or won't (more won't than will) work.

Doesn't mean that the instructors there aren't nice guys; most of them I've met seem to be.

Author:  djeepp [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 3:06 pm ]
Post subject: 

I was very close to taking my class there in February (they offer a discount coupon in their version of the MN Tactics book). I'm glad I opted for Mr. Blinko instead. I have a feeling that I am much better off for doing so.

Author:  PoorSSJ [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 3:56 pm ]
Post subject: 

joelr wrote:
Doesn't mean that the instructors there aren't nice guys; most of them I've met seem to be.


The instructor was very friendly and entertaining, no complaint's about that at all. He seemed like a really nice guy.

Author:  onebohemian [ Wed Apr 08, 2009 4:14 pm ]
Post subject: 

PoorSSJ wrote:
. . . aside from those two apparent misinterpretations of the statutes, and not giving me what I paid for (the extra range time advertised in the course description) I though he did a good job


If you weren't being sarcastic with this point, you have got to be the most glass-half-full guy I've ever encountered. Dude, you deserved better.

Author:  Andrew Rothman [ Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:56 am ]
Post subject: 

Don't worry about it too much.

Although the info in your carry class is part of the very thin line between freedom and incarceration, I'm sure there are a number of things that the instructor did get right, and, after all, he did have a pleasant demeanor. :roll:

Author:  joelr [ Thu Apr 09, 2009 7:10 am ]
Post subject: 

Andrew Rothman wrote:
Don't worry about it too much.

Although the info in your carry class is part of the very thin line between freedom and incarceration, I'm sure there are a number of things that the instructor did get right, and, after all, he did have a pleasant demeanor. :roll:
Can't blame him, necessarily; I took a quick look at the Bill's website and spotted one serious factual error on where it's lawful to carry -- not his fault if he's passing out bad information he's been given by management.

Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/