Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 6:42 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.  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
 Precedent for MOA Carry?? 
Author Message
 Post subject: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:19 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:25 am
Posts: 1772
Location: North Central Texas (now)
Even though MN law stipulates that lessors can't post buildings that are rented to lessees, it appears that I may have stumbled upon legal precedent to really stop the Mall cops from harassing folks that carry at the mall:

http://supreme.justia.com/us/407/551/

Just a thought.

_________________
A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have. - Barry Goldwater

"...quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est." [...a sword never kills anybody; it's a tool in the killer's hand.] -- (Lucius Annaeus) Seneca "the Younger" (ca. 4 BC-65 AD),

The Nanny State MUST DIE!!!


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:25 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 7:22 am
Posts: 114
Location: Faribault, MN
You better go test er out. :lol:

_________________
"There are good men and bad men of all nationalities, creeds and colors; and if this world of ours is ever to become what we hope some day it may become, it must be by the general recognition that the man's heart and soul, the man's worth and actions, determine his standing."
-Theodore Roosevelt


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:29 am 
Senior Member

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 188
Location: Saint Paul
INAL and don't have the legal prowess required to understand whether that would work or not but it sure would be nice. But, even if legal precedent is found, someone still needs to be the test case. I sure wish I had really deep pockets.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 3:53 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:25 am
Posts: 1772
Location: North Central Texas (now)
Harland wrote:
You better go test er out. :lol:



Kind of difficult for me to do that because I no longer live in MN. 1000 miles (one way) is a heck of a trip to be a test case. I know that there are some lawyers on the board, perhaps it's something they could comment on??


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:03 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 5270
Location: Minneapolis
A common phrase around here is: You might beat the rap. but you can't beat the ride.

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


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 10:05 am 
Senior Member

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:39 pm
Posts: 124
I will definetely hold the video camera for anyone who wants to try it out.

_________________
But if “bear
arms” means, as the petitioners and the dissent think, the
Opinion of the Court
carrying of arms only for military purposes, one simply
cannot add “for the purpose of killing game.” The right “to
carry arms in the militia for the purpose of killing game”
is worthy of the mad hatter.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 10:51 am 
Raving Moderate
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:46 pm
Posts: 1292
Location: Minneapolis
jrp267 wrote:
I will definetely hold the video camera for anyone who wants to try it out.


Is that like "I've got your back... ...WAY back..."? :wink:

As far as the OP, IANAL, but it appears the Supreme Court reversed the lower court ruling and ruled that the mall could indeed prohibit distribution of handbills on its premises:
Quote:
Held: There has been no dedication of petitioner's privately owned and operated shopping center to public use so as to entitle respondents to exercise First Amendment rights therein that are unrelated to the center's operations, and petitioner's property did not lose its private character and its right to protection under the Fourteenth Amendment merely because the public is generally invited to use it for the purpose of doing business with petitioner's tenants.

_________________
I'm liberal, pro-choice, and I carry a gun. Any questions?

My real name is Jeremiah (go figure). ;)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 11:22 am 
Senior Member

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:39 pm
Posts: 124
Jeremiah wrote:
jrp267 wrote:
I will definetely hold the video camera for anyone who wants to try it out.


Is that like "I've got your back... ...WAY back..."? :wink:

As far as the OP, IANAL, but it appears the Supreme Court reversed the lower court ruling and ruled that the mall could indeed prohibit distribution of handbills on its premises:
Quote:
Held: There has been no dedication of petitioner's privately owned and operated shopping center to public use so as to entitle respondents to exercise First Amendment rights therein that are unrelated to the center's operations, and petitioner's property did not lose its private character and its right to protection under the Fourteenth Amendment merely because the public is generally invited to use it for the purpose of doing business with petitioner's tenants.

Oh I would be close just not close enough to get a free ride to the security office.

_________________
But if “bear
arms” means, as the petitioners and the dissent think, the
Opinion of the Court
carrying of arms only for military purposes, one simply
cannot add “for the purpose of killing game.” The right “to
carry arms in the militia for the purpose of killing game”
is worthy of the mad hatter.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 12:32 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:40 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Eden Prairie
jrp267 wrote:
Jeremiah wrote:
jrp267 wrote:
I will definetely hold the video camera for anyone who wants to try it out.


Is that like "I've got your back... ...WAY back..."? :wink:

As far as the OP, IANAL, but it appears the Supreme Court reversed the lower court ruling and ruled that the mall could indeed prohibit distribution of handbills on its premises:
Quote:
Held: There has been no dedication of petitioner's privately owned and operated shopping center to public use so as to entitle respondents to exercise First Amendment rights therein that are unrelated to the center's operations, and petitioner's property did not lose its private character and its right to protection under the Fourteenth Amendment merely because the public is generally invited to use it for the purpose of doing business with petitioner's tenants.

Oh I would be close just not close enough to get a free ride to the security office.


Awww, but then you won't be able to get the full experience of their anti-terrorism team. :mrgreen:

-Mark


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 1:07 pm 
Senior Member

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:39 pm
Posts: 124
It is definetly up my ally. I would in the right circumstances be the guinnea pig. But currently I can not afford the economic risk that comes with such a venture.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:30 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 12:22 pm
Posts: 339
Location: Suburban Twin Cities, MN
BigRobT wrote:
Even though MN law stipulates that lessors can't post buildings that are rented to lessees, it appears that I may have stumbled upon legal precedent to really stop the Mall cops from harassing folks that carry at the mall:

http://supreme.justia.com/us/407/551/

Just a thought.


Out of purely morbid curiosity, WHY do you think Lloyd v. Tanner would prevent "mall cops from harassing folks that carry?"


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:43 pm 
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 5:16 pm
Posts: 23
Location: Minneapolis
I usually carry during the (very few) times I've been to the MOA. Last time I visited their signage didn't meet MN language guidelines, wasn't posted at all entrances, and there was the lessor/lessee issues as well. Since I'm such an upright citizen I even emailed them through their website explaining all this and never got a reply.

Have they changed things up recently?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 3:12 pm 
The Man
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:43 am
Posts: 7970
Location: Minneapolis MN
aczarnowski wrote:

Have they changed things up recently?
Yup. They made the signs even less compliant.

_________________
Just a guy.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 4:36 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 12:09 am
Posts: 983
Location: Brewster
aczarnowski wrote:
I usually carry during the (very few) times I've been to the MOA. Last time I visited their signage didn't meet MN language guidelines, wasn't posted at all entrances, and there was the lessor/lessee issues as well. Since I'm such an upright citizen I even emailed them through their website explaining all this and never got a reply.

Have they changed things up recently?



Why would you want to "wise up a chump" ? :? IMO we should not teach them the law and how to post a compliant sign (not that it really matters any with the way the law is written).

_________________
Professional Firearms Training. LLC.
http://www.mngunclass.com


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Precedent for MOA Carry??
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 4:47 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:40 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Eden Prairie
jaysong wrote:
aczarnowski wrote:
I usually carry during the (very few) times I've been to the MOA. Last time I visited their signage didn't meet MN language guidelines, wasn't posted at all entrances, and there was the lessor/lessee issues as well. Since I'm such an upright citizen I even emailed them through their website explaining all this and never got a reply.

Have they changed things up recently?



Why would you want to "wise up a chump" ? :? IMO we should not teach them the law and how to post a compliant sign (not that it really matters any with the way the law is written).


Gotta agree with you on this one...


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  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: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 28 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:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group