- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Meet 22-year-old Elisjsha Dicken who took down the shooter last night
Posted on 7/19/22 at 12:17 am to AggieHank86
Posted on 7/19/22 at 12:17 am to AggieHank86
quote:
The mall is private property. They get to set the terms for entry upon that property. You have the option of shopping elsewhere if you dislike the rules.
So did black people who chose to eat at diners.
quote:
Either you respect private property rights or you do not.
This is a childish and false dichotomy that you attempt to use way too often.
0
Posted on 7/19/22 at 8:25 am to mjthe
Jody couldn’t get through her opinion without throwing in the hero was disrespectful for having his gun. 
Posted on 7/19/22 at 8:28 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Either you respect private property rights or you do not. This thread tends to indicate that most here do not.
For someone who has admitted his Daddy's farm employs illegals from time to time, you sure do run your mouth alot about respect and the Law.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 8:42 am to AggieHank86
quote:
It appears the Indiana law provides absolute civil immunity in cases such as this. See Indiana Code Sec. 34-30-31-1(1)(b).
Does Louisiana have a similar statute?
Posted on 7/19/22 at 8:49 am to AggieHank86
quote:
But I disagree with DB’s sentiment. The mall is private property. They get to set the terms for entry upon that property. You have the option of shopping elsewhere if you dislike the rules.
They can set whatever terms they want. It doesn't carry the force of law. If a business doesn't like that, they're free to go to a state that does.
quote:
Either you respect private property rights or you do not. This thread tends to indicate that most here do not.
You're not trying to draw a parallel between the mall and someone's private residence, are you?
Posted on 7/19/22 at 8:55 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:Take a look at Indiana Code § 35-43-2-2 ( criminal trespass)).
"Although authorities said Dicken was legally armed, the mall prohibits people from carrying weapons on its property."quote:
I don't believe policy carries the force of law in Indiana.
I doubt the mall presses charges, but it looks to me like the posted signage constitutes a prohibition upon entry with a firearm, making any such entry a misdemeanor criminal trespass.
Again, probably academic since no charges will be pressed in this case and the kid has civil immunity for the shooting.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 8:57 am to oogabooga68
quote:
For someone who has admitted his Daddy's farm employs illegals from time to time, you sure do run your mouth alot about respect and the Law.
He's also quick to cluck his tongue about nuance, typically claiming that most posters are incapable of grasping it. Then the next day he's doing the "you either respect xxxxx rights or you do not" routine.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:00 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Take a look at Indiana Code § 35-43-2-2 ( criminal trespass)).
I doubt the mall presses charges, but it looks to me like the posted signage constitutes a prohibition upon entry with a firearm, making any such entry a misdemeanor criminal trespass.
Again, probably academic since no charges will be pressed in this case and the kid has civil immunity for the shooting.
Did the mall ask him to leave? Correct me if I'm wrong, but this statute wouldn't apply in Indiana for merely carrying on the property because no firearms signs do not carry the force of law in the state.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:01 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:Constitutionally, I see no difference. Whether I own a double-wide or a mall, my property is my property.
Either you respect private property rights or you do not. This thread tends to indicate that most here do not.quote:
You're not trying to draw a parallel between the mall and someone's private residence, are you?
I know that you are not so simple as to argue Public Accomodation, but others are not, so …
There is no Civil Rights Act in play here, and in any case I stand by my belief that public accomodation laws are a completely unconstitutional extension of the Commerce Clause.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:07 am to DisplacedBuckeye
Section (2)(b)(1) says that a person commits a trespass if he enters real property … after having been denied entry.
Section (2)(c) says a person has been “denied entry” under subsection (b)(1) when the person has been denied entry by means of posting … a notice … in a manner that is … likely to come to the attention of the public.
Your opinion of re applicability? (not re the underlying policy)
Section (2)(c) says a person has been “denied entry” under subsection (b)(1) when the person has been denied entry by means of posting … a notice … in a manner that is … likely to come to the attention of the public.
Your opinion of re applicability? (not re the underlying policy)
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:07 am to DisplacedBuckeye
Here's what USCCA says about Indiana law.
quote:
"No Weapons Allowed" Signs Enforced?
Are "No Weapons Allowed" signs enforced in Indiana? If yes, violating the sign would be considered to be a crime. If no, violating the sign would not be considered a criminal offense.
No. "No Weapons Allowed" signs are not enforced in Indiana.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:08 am to Bobby OG Johnson
This is why the second amendment is so important.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:08 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Constitutionally, I see no difference. Whether I own a double-wide or a mall, my property is my property.
That's fine. I'm still not seeing "disrespect."
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:09 am to Bobby OG Johnson
quote:
Eli told her to get down, pulled a pistol and attacked the suspect.
The narrative
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:10 am to Flats
quote:Please explain what nuance you see.
Flats
The second amendment prevents GOVERNMENTAL interference with gun possession (insert anti-Incorporation diatribe). It does not speak to private persons (property owners).
You have a near-absolute right to carry a firearm in public places. You do not have the same right on private property.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:13 am to DisplacedBuckeye
The fact that a law is not generally enforced does not mean that the conduct is rendered legal. You know this.
Read the statute. Does it say that there was technically a trespass, or does it not.
Again, the kid will clearly not be prosecuted. This is an academic exercise.
Read the statute. Does it say that there was technically a trespass, or does it not.
Again, the kid will clearly not be prosecuted. This is an academic exercise.
This post was edited on 7/19/22 at 9:16 am
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:14 am to AggieHank86
quote:
You do not have the same right on private property.
I never said I did. I did say (or if I didn't I'm saying it now) that I'm comfortable violating their wishes in this particular instance because it puts zero burden on them. If they had a sign prohibiting men from wearing boxer shorts as their underwear I would ignore it in a similar fashion.
This post was edited on 7/19/22 at 9:17 am
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:16 am to AggieHank86
quote:
The fact that a law is not generally enforced does not mean that the conduct is rendered legal. You know this.
It’s not illegal. And the signs don’t carry the weight of law. Is this your crusade du jour?
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:18 am to Flats
So, you understand that you are engaged in a criminal trespass, and you are fine with that.
Fair enough.
Fair enough.
This post was edited on 7/19/22 at 9:24 am
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:19 am to AggieHank86
Hank, you ought to know what force of law means. You also ought to know that you can't point to one specific statute and ignore the rest.
If you think a no firearms sign carries the force of law, take it up with every other legal mind who disagrees with you there.
If you think a no firearms sign carries the force of law, take it up with every other legal mind who disagrees with you there.
Page 7 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News