Inadvertent carry into a "no gun" store

[GreyGeek]

ends well for the CHP after he uses his weapon  to stop a robber who  was on a spree. 

While standing in the checkout line, Nazir Al-Mujaahid says that he saw a man with a shotgun pointed at a cashier, demanding money. He also saw an unarmed security guard helpless with his hands up.
...
In spite of his willingness to be open and answer questions publicly, some media outlets again attempted to paint him as a felon who somehow was able to get around the system and obtain his conceal and carry permit.
...
Yet, on the other side of the debate, those who still have strong feeings opposing the law, don’t feel so grateful to Al-Mujaahid. State representative Leon Young’s released the following statement: “I am extremely grateful that no innocent people were injured during Monday’s incident and the suspects have been apprehended,” said Rep. Young. “However, circumstances in this instant raise questions about the effectiveness of the training requirements in the law, he added. Monday’s incident involved a concealed carry permit holder carrying a weapon into a business that had posted signage explicitly banned them. The permit holder fired upon the robbers, one of who sustained non-life threatening injuries.”

Al-Mujaahid states that he did not see the sign banning any weapons from the Aldi Store, and if he had seen the sign he would have not shopped at the store. He shared that many businesses have it wrong with the posting of these signs banning weapons…Why?…Because robbers are not going to follow the signs, and law abiding citizens that do follow the signs become targets for the robbers. Businesses posting the signs may find themselves easy targets for potential robbers in his opinion.

- See more at: http://milwaukeecourieronline.com/index.php/2012/02/11/aldi-customer-speaks-out-on-aftermath-of-shooting/#sthash.pUdiGIXQ.dpuf

[unfy]

I talked with one of the managers at the Aldi on Cornhusker near Kennedy.  Basically, the policy is set by corporate, they'd forward stuff along, etc - I've not gotten any return contact.

Their sign was hard to notice...

http://nebraskafirearms.org/forum/index.php/topic,857.msg45650.html#msg45650

[HuskerXDM]

http://nebraskafirearms.org/forum/index.php/topic,857.msg45650.html#msg45650

"Oh crud, the sign says no ordinance, I'd better leave the bomb in my car."  Said no criminal, ever.

[fishguy]

My CCW instructor basically said to not patronize stores that are not gun friendly. I don't go to stores that have gun prohibited signs on their doors if possible. I am a commodity. I am of 2% in the state of Nebraska that has earned the right to carry a firearm LEGALLY. I am not a felon or drug addict. Why ban the people deemed qualified to carry a weapon from shopping in your store? I suggest you all not patronize these stores either if possible. Just my .02 cents...

[NE Bull]

My CCW instructor basically said to not patronize stores that are not gun friendly. I don't go to stores that have gun prohibited signs on their doors if possible. I am a commodity. I am of 2% in the state of Nebraska that has earned the right to carry a firearm LEGALLY. I am not a felon or drug addict. Why ban the people deemed qualified to carry a weapon from shopping in your store? I suggest you all not patronize these stores either if possible. Just my .02 cents...

Sorry, fishguy, I see you are new here, so let me enlighten you a bit- You did not "Earn" the right to keep and bear arms.  You were Born into that right of self defense as a human being by our Creator. You were Guaranteed that right as a citizen of the US of A by the Founding Fathers of this nation in a simple but profound statement written upon a piece of paper we covet, called the Constitution.!  That little scrap of paper you carry, issued to you by the state of Nebraska is a sort of "stay outta jail" card.  It's much cheaper to go thru the steps to obtain a permit than, say,  a lengthy court case because a few people get scared and just don't understand.
 Sorry, just thought I would clarify that. Please take no offense.

Now onto the story at hand.
Obviously, as they say about clarity of hindsight, this fella did a few things right, but just enough wrong. Tactically- he waited until the aggressor's attention was not on him, And most importantly, his target was not near innocents, ie. a clear shot with little to no collateral damage.  BUT,  as the deed was already done and the perp was, seemingly, exiting the building, in the eyes of a judge/jury with the proper push from a lawyer,  it could be said the immediate threat was no longer present,  and thus the CCW holder then did not have the "right" to fire. 

Now, is it just me, but was there an accomplice that went past the perp and ran toward the back of the store?  Or where did that guy come from?

[fishguy]

 None taken. I totally agree with you on every level you speak of. Don't think of me as taking any of what you have said for granted. I didn't feel like I stepped on our founding fathers or the constitution by anything I said. I did have to "earn" the piece of paper however you want to slice the pie. I appreciate your comments and I thank god daily for the people that came before me to give me what I have. I need no lesson I assure you.

[patrickdm]

I went to a custom shoe place that was under construction and I wasn't sure they were open. I opened the door and peeked in and asked if they were and the clerk said come on in and sign in. I did then before setting down to wait I noticed the no guns in the store sign. I told the clerk that I needed to go because I was carrying. She looked at me and said, "Oh don't worry about it, you're not the only one in here who is." Talk about being confused. I said no more about it and took care of business. I would prefer not to patronize them any longer but may have to as my insurance provider is balking at finding me a new place.

Confuses me that a place that allows the workers to carry won't allow the customers. So much for sticking together.

[RobertH]

I went to a custom shoe place that was under construction and I wasn't sure they were open. I opened the door and peeked in and asked if they were and the clerk said come on in and sign in. I did then before setting down to wait I noticed the no guns in the store sign. I told the clerk that I needed to go because I was carrying. She looked at me and said, "Oh don't worry about it, you're not the only one in here who is." Talk about being confused. I said no more about it and took care of business. I would prefer not to patronize them any longer but may have to as my insurance provider is balking at finding me a new place.

Confuses me that a place that allows the workers to carry won't allow the customers. So much for sticking together.

sounds like they need some NFOA pamphlets and some "no gun=no money" business cards.

[JTH]

I went to a custom shoe place that was under construction and I wasn't sure they were open. I opened the door and peeked in and asked if they were and the clerk said come on in and sign in. I did then before setting down to wait I noticed the no guns in the store sign. I told the clerk that I needed to go because I was carrying. She looked at me and said, "Oh don't worry about it, you're not the only one in here who is." Talk about being confused. I said no more about it and took care of business.

The worst thing is that if for some reason a police officer officially sees that you have a weapon in that store, you'll lose your permit.  Doesn't really matter what the clerk says.  If it is posted, that's it, no matter what anyone in the store says to you, even if it is the owner of the store.

(You'd get to argue that one in court, and I'm pretty sure you wouldn't like it.)

[FarmerRick]

The worst thing is that if for some reason a police officer officially sees that you have a weapon in that store, you'll lose your permit.  Doesn't really matter what the clerk says.  If it is posted, that's it, no matter what anyone in the store says to you, even if it is the owner of the store.

(You'd get to argue that one in court, and I'm pretty sure you wouldn't like it.)

Not for first offense.... http://uniweb.legislature.ne.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=69-2443

(4) A permitholder convicted of a violation of section 69-2441 that occurred on property owned by the state or any political subdivision of the state may also have his or her permit revoked. A permitholder convicted of a violation of section 69-2441 that did not occur on property owned by the state or any political subdivision of the state shall not have his or her permit revoked for a first offense but may have his or her permit revoked for any second or subsequent offense.

[HuskerXDM]

Unless on State property... because they're more important than the rest of us.

Not for first offense.... http://uniweb.legislature.ne.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=69-2443

(4) A permitholder convicted of a violation of section 69-2441 that occurred on property owned by the state or any political subdivision of the state may also have his or her permit revoked. A permitholder convicted of a violation of section 69-2441 that did not occur on property owned by the state or any political subdivision of the state shall not have his or her permit revoked for a first offense but may have his or her permit revoked for any second or subsequent offense.

[patrickdm]

Thanks for that info FarmerRick. I need to study the laws/regs better.

[JTH]

Not for first offense....

Ah, yep.  I was generalizing, and I shouldn't have.

I should have said "no matter what, you'll be charged and lose in court" as opposed to what I said.

Thanks for the cite!