You better go test er out.
| Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive http://twincitiescarry.com/forum/ |
|
| Precedent for MOA Carry?? http://twincitiescarry.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13332 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | BigRobT [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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. |
|
| Author: | Harland [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
You better go test er out.
|
|
| Author: | 340PD [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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. |
|
| Author: | BigRobT [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 3:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
Harland wrote: You better go test er out. 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?? |
|
| Author: | DeanC [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
A common phrase around here is: You might beat the rap. but you can't beat the ride. |
|
| Author: | jrp267 [ Sun Jun 21, 2009 10:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
I will definetely hold the video camera for anyone who wants to try it out. |
|
| Author: | Jeremiah [ Sun Jun 21, 2009 10:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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..."?  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. |
|
| Author: | jrp267 [ Sun Jun 21, 2009 11:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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..."? 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. |
|
| Author: | mrokern [ Sun Jun 21, 2009 12:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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..."? 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.  -Mark |
|
| Author: | jrp267 [ Sun Jun 21, 2009 1:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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. |
|
| Author: | Lawyer_in_Training [ Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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?" |
|
| Author: | aczarnowski [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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? |
|
| Author: | joelr [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 3:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
aczarnowski wrote: Have they changed things up recently? |
|
| Author: | jaysong [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 4:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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).
|
|
| Author: | mrokern [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 4:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Precedent for MOA Carry?? |
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... |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|