No CCW Signage

[Randy]

Forum member?s your opinions on requesting a State Unicameral Senator proposition a Bill to mandate specific no firearm signage and placement.
The current law virtually allows any signage stating no firearms permitted.
There are pros and cons to everything.
The Pros being that we would have a standardized signage and location of such for all to see.
Thus fewer CCP holders would unintentionally be breaking the current law.
The Cons are that it may bring additional attention to the fact that any business can post such a sign and choose to exercise their legal right.
Thus increase the amount of businesses where CCW is prohibited.

Current From State Patrol Web Site:
018.04 State law does not mandate a specific requirement for a sign other than that it
be conspicuously posted, the Nebraska State Patrol strongly suggests that a
standardized format be utilized. The standardized form should contain a four
(4) inch circle with a slash covering a handgun and text giving notice that
carrying a concealed handgun anywhere on the premises is prohibited. A
form will be available on the Nebraska State Patrol website which can be
downloaded for printing. The Nebraska State Patrol also strongly
recommends that a place or premises wishing to prohibit concealed handguns
post the sign at normal eye level at each public entrance to the place or
premises. Normal eye level is considered to be between 54? and 66? from the
floor.

[SBarry]

I think the state should have the convicts make them in the pen. The signs would be all the same, have to be yellow (like the cowards who put them in their places of business), be about 3 feet tall and 2 feet wide, and cost about $300 each (about what it cost for a CCW permit). How many of the cheap Dims would actually buy them then?  Make them big, ugly and impossible to miss. Basically a big sign that says "We are easy to rob, don't worry about getting shot here!"

Here is another idea. Before someone can post a "No CCW" sign, make them take a class and apply for a permit, with questions about how they are going to provide for the safety of customers if someone comes into the business intent on causing harm. They would have to list all safety measures that are in place and prove they have the proper insurance to pay all medical costs and/or survivor benefits to the families of the victims who were disarmed due to their policy.

Sounds far fetched, but it is the same crap that we have to put up with.

[ranger04]

Could not agree with you more. Make a GFZ then YOU assume any and all liability for any injury or death that occurs on your property. I think this should aply to cities as well.

[armed and humorous]

Personally, I'd be more inclined to leave well enough alone.  At least in Lincoln, I haven't come across too many posted establishments.  I'm afraid the more publicity it gets, the more of them may decide to post.  Sure, if we could somehow make it a mandatory signage that cost the businesses a fortune to obtain, it might keep some from doing it.  But, that's not going to happen.  If they did make it so only one type of sign was legitimate, they would still probably make it downloadable for free as the recommended signs are now.

Also, with the current state of things, a CHP holder who goes in armed anyway might be able to claim they didn't recognize the sign that was up if someone uses a home made version or something like that.  If they are all the same and posted in a similar conspicuous fashion, it would be hard to claim you were unaware of it.

I'm not totally against the idea.  In fact, I'd have preferred they had done it that way to start with.  But now, I worry that any publicity would only create more no-gun zones.  Also, the signs recommended by the State only apply to CHP holders carrying concealed.  If we push them, businesses can also ban guns in any form or method of carry.  Right now, if you have your Glock on your hip covered by your shirt, and you come to a posted establishment, you could conceivably just tuck your shirt in and go on in (though I'd be somewhat surprised if they didn't either ask you to leave or call the cops - who wouldn't be able to do anything anyway outside of ask you to leave).  Well, I should say, the cops "shouldn't" do anything other than ask you to leave (assuming the management requested them to do that) since you have done nothing illegal.

[Dan W]

  Right now, if you have your Glock on your hip covered by your shirt, and you come to a posted establishment, you could conceivably just tuck your shirt in and go on in (though I'd be somewhat surprised if they didn't either ask you to leave or call the cops - who wouldn't be able to do anything anyway outside of ask you to leave).  Well, I should say, the cops "shouldn't" do anything other than ask you to leave (assuming the management requested them to do that) since you have done nothing illegal.

The following offenses are classified as a Class III Misdemeanor for the first offense and as a Class I Misdemeanor for the second or subsequent offense:
  Permit holder carrying a concealed handgun into a prohibited place or premises.
(See ? 018 in the regulations or ?69-2441 in the statutes.)

http://www.nsp.state.ne.us/Docs/Forms/CCW_Rules_and_Regs.pdf

[Roper]

With our latest victory with LB 430 and the shooting range protection - I would use the momentum to get more substantial things passed, like the Castle Law.   Uniform signs would be nice, but I don't see them as critically important.

[armed and humorous]

Yes, Dan W, I know it is a violation to carry concealed into a posted establishment.  Did I say something that contradicted that?  I don't think so, unless you misunderstood the statement of mine that you quoted.

[Dan W]

Sorry , I misread your post

[armed and humorous]

Yeah, I do that too sometimes. 

[huskergun]

With our latest victory with LB 430 and the shooting range protection - I would use the momentum to get more substantial things passed, like the Castle Law.   Uniform signs would be nice, but I don't see them as critically important.

I'm with you Roper. Castle and the 10th Amendment are more important right now I feel.

[armed and humorous]

Yes, let's all get behind a castle law for Nebraska.  Better yet, a nation-wide castle law.  As with concealed carry permits, a castle law "shouldn't" even be necessary, as the right to bear arms along with the right to life and liberty (and therefore the right to defend oneself) are inalienable rights that should need no further qualifications.  However, it appears, for now, that in order to keep from being charged with some kind of crime, or being sued, we need to get this on the books so we are not penalized by simply excercising our rights.

"No brainer" is not a term I particularly like to use, but it seems appropriate in the case of self-defense.  Given that life and liberty are probably the two things most important to us, I don't understand how anyone in their right mind could deny that we have the right to defend ourselves at any time or place it may be necessary.

[Rich B]

I disagree.  I am STRONGLY in favor of a uniform signage requirement.

My place of employment is posted.  From three feet away, they look like no smoking signs since they say NO SMOKING in big bold letters.  In tiny, itty bitty letters underneath, it says something to the effect of "no weapons of any type are permitted on the premises."  You have to be on top of the sign to read it.  As casual glance leads you to believe it is just a no smoking sign.  It's a shady tactic, and one that might get someone arrested.  

We need to take Texas' lead and require a sign that would require:
-written language similar to the following (from TX's statute): "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Article 4413(29ee), Revised Statutes (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"
-includes the language described above in both English and Spanish;
-appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
-is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.


I'm sick of the misleading signs, the 2"x2" "No revolvers" signs, and other cowardly tactics.  

The above would result in a pretty big sign that would be quite conspicuous.  Ever been to a c-store that has 101 different signs and stickers on it?  Then you have to search for a No CCW sign...  it's insane.

[armed and humorous]

As I said in my earlier comment, I am not necessarily opposed to uniform signage, perhaps similar to that in Texas.  If that's what the majority of us think is best, I'll go along without complaint.  Again, I wish they would have required it in the beginning.

It seems odd to me that a private property owner would use a sign such as RichB described if they truly don't want weapons in the establishment.  After all, if the sign isn't obvious enough to work, they're going to have people come in with guns unaware they've done anything wrong.  The result is they have guns in the establishment that they didn't want.  I can see where they might not really care if guns come in except, as was the case with the Douglas Theaters, if their liability insurance rates go up unless they post.  By posting inconspicuously, they may meet the requirements of the insurance company without raising the ire of gun owners.  The result: they keep lower rates and don't lose business.  Yes, they still get guns carried in, but they didn't really care about that in the first place.  I'm not sure what RichB means by a shady tactic, but I doubt they are trying to trap some poor CHP holder into breaking the law.  How would they ever find out?  Pat down all their customers?  Not likely.  But, whatever the reason, it does happen, and it doesn't do us any favors.  At my work, they use the standard recommended signs.  Had they done something like at RichB's place, I think I would have requested that they either not post, or I would have given them the standards signs I downloaded myself to use.

[SBarry]

I want uniform and very noticeable signs, because as I am driving by, I want to see it, and just keep driving, instead of finding a place to park, getting the kids out of the vehicle, walking to the door, only to notice that they don't want my money. I have stopped at the door, turned around and left before.

No CCW=No Money, even if I am not carrying.

[FarmerRick]

I want uniform and very noticeable signs, because as I am driving by, I want to see it, and just keep driving, instead of finding a place to park, getting the kids out of the vehicle, walking to the door, only to notice that they don't want my money. I have stopped at the door, turned around and left before.

No CCW=No Money, even if I am not carrying.

Same policy I use, whenever possible.  I try to give these cards out when I encounter a business that has a "no gun sign". 
It is set up to be printed on an Avery business card format.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[huskergun]

Thanks Rick.

[SeanN]

I want uniform and very noticeable signs, because as I am driving by, I want to see it, and just keep driving, instead of finding a place to park, getting the kids out of the vehicle, walking to the door, only to notice that they don't want my money. I have stopped at the door, turned around and left before.

No CCW=No Money, even if I am not carrying.

Same policy I use, whenever possible.  I try to give these cards out when I encounter a business that has a "no gun sign". 
It is set up to be printed on an Avery business card format.

I LIKE THAT! Now if only I wasn't too much of a pansy to go and hand it to someone that works at these places. I'm too shy for my own good sometimes.

[DanClrk51]

I also agree that signage should be uniform and that if it is not uniform it is not valid. I think we should enact Texas style language, but it should include a depiction of a handgun with a slash through it. I just don't know if this is the right time for this, as some have said it could increase no gun zones. I think the upcoming legislative session we should concentrate on enacting a good Castle Doctrine law in the mold of Floridas law (No Duty to Retreat. Stand your Ground. Meet Force with Force, in your home, vehicle, and anywhere you have a legal right to be. Immunity from civil liability if justified in criminal court) and also include in this legisation presentation of the weapon(s) as of right now from what I hear if you brandish your weapon in Nebraska you can get in trouble. You should be able to put your hand on the handle and/or draw the weapon and point it at a threat as a counterthreat.

Thanks FarmerRick for posting the cards I didn't know there was a new design floating around. I still have a stack of the old Iowa designed ones.

[FarmerRick]

No problem.  By the way, these are NOT an official NFOA card in any way.  I just whipped them up one day using some verbage from a few different "no guns = no money" card examples I found on the inter-webs.

[Dark Helmet]

signage needs to be addressed... In Lincoln, go to Valentino's (any of them) and you have to stand outside and hunt for the freaking signs... they ARE there, but good luck finding them!