AMC movie theaters are anti.

Golddiggie said:
Don't go there... Not all 1911's are single stack. Anyone with two opposable thumbs and more than half a brain can maintain them (take apart, reassemble, clean, etc.).
Click to expand...

The M1911 is almost as dated as the Mosin Nagants bolt. Sure, anyone with half a brain can take it apart, but **** that. I can get a glock apart 100%, every piece out of it faster than the casual 1911 owner running a field strip no doubt.

The only pistol I can think of that's more asinine to take apart is the MK III.
 
Yea, I agree. In fact they just want to make sure that if you are armed that you have a reliable gun with more than 6 or 7 rounds.

Dench said:
can you blame them?

low cap, hard to maintain, hard to take apart, on and on.

Sounds like AMC has good taste in guns it doesn't like if you ask me.
Click to expand...



Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
 
Dench said:
The M1911 is almost as dated as the Mosin Nagants bolt. Sure, anyone with half a brain can take it apart, but **** that. I can get a glock apart 100%, every piece out of it faster than the casual 1911 owner running a field strip no doubt.

The only pistol I can think of that's more asinine to take apart is the MK III.
Click to expand...

Don't turn this into a tangent thread...

Suffice to say, I don't field strip my firearms for speed. I also properly maintain them so the chances of actually NEEDING to do so is extremely remote. I also have a series 80 type 1911 high cap pistol. ONLY reason I might need to break it down, in the field, is if I get a squib. Since I have one of my squib rods in the range bag, I might even be able to remove that without removing the barrel.

Enough on that already. If you like the glock, fine. IMO, it's an ugly design. I prefer SA pistols, not DA...

I'm interested to know if AMC has any legal backing on such signs in NH and VT (ME too)... Or does it only have weight in nanny states?
 
wimsey1 said:
It is my understanding that "no gun" signs do carry force of law in Massachusetts and are not merely "suggestions." Is this incorrect? I have made the decision to carry in such places anyway as have most of you, but it is a decision informed by the consequences of breaking that law.
Click to expand...

Show us the law, then. Unless or until something is codified as ILLegal, then it is otherwise LEGAL.

It is *my* understanding (someone correct ME if I'm wrong) that only Federally prohibited places (courthouses, post offices, etc.) can legally ban you from carrying there. Anyplace else you're perfectly within your rights to walk past the sign with your pistol. All they can do if they see you with a gun is ask you to leave. Legally, you must comply, or be arrested for disturbing the peace (or something along those lines).
 
I was going to ask: Lets follow this through with a scenario.

You lean over, someone sees your gun, they go get the manager, manager calls police. Can they possibly arrest you for trespassing? Disturbing the peace? Then you would have to go through the court process?

I know in my podunk town I know over half the cops and they'd say your fine just get the hell out of here, but what if your in some Eastern Mass cinemaplex and you get some punk cop that wants to crack your head open?
 
wimsey1 said:
It is my understanding that "no gun" signs do carry force of law in Massachusetts and are not merely "suggestions." Is this incorrect? I have made the decision to carry in such places anyway as have most of you, but it is a decision informed by the consequences of breaking that law.
Click to expand...

PaulR said:
I was going to ask: Lets follow this through with a scenario.

You lean over, someone sees your gun, they go get the manager, manager calls police. Can they possibly arrest you for trespassing? Disturbing the peace? Then you would have to go through the court process?

I know in my podunk town I know over half the cops and they'd say your fine just get the hell out of here, but what if your in some Eastern Mass cinemaplex and you get some punk cop that wants to crack your head open?
Click to expand...

signage in MA is not legally binding, period. it's merely a suggestion. you are breaking no laws carrying unless it's already a place you can't carry such as a federal building, school, etc.

if discovered rest assured the cops will show up and you'll have to leave. if asked to leave and you don't, you're now trespassing and NOW you're guilty of something in a legal sense.

if you live in a super-anti town you might get charged with something, but that's unlikely and a decent lawyer would shoot the charges full of holes. pun intended. if you're a dick to the responding officers in an anti town expect to leave in bracelets.

wikommen zu amerika/massachusetts.
 
Golddiggie said:
Don't turn this into a tangent thread...

Suffice to say, I don't field strip my firearms for speed. I also properly maintain them so the chances of actually NEEDING to do so is extremely remote. I also have a series 80 type 1911 high cap pistol. ONLY reason I might need to break it down, in the field, is if I get a squib. Since I have one of my squib rods in the range bag, I might even be able to remove that without removing the barrel.

Enough on that already. If you like the glock, fine. IMO, it's an ugly design. I prefer SA pistols, not DA...

I'm interested to know if AMC has any legal backing on such signs in NH and VT (ME too)... Or does it only have weight in nanny states?
Click to expand...

The sign doesnt mean anything in this nanny state. It's as irrelevant as the M1911.
 
StevieP said:
Show us the law, then. Unless or until something is codified as ILLegal, then it is otherwise LEGAL.

It is *my* understanding (someone correct ME if I'm wrong) that only Federally prohibited places (courthouses, post offices, etc.) can legally ban you from carrying there. Anyplace else you're perfectly within your rights to walk past the sign with your pistol. All they can do if they see you with a gun is ask you to leave. Legally, you must comply, or be arrested for disturbing the peace (or something along those lines).
Click to expand...

Part IV, Title I, Chpt 266 Section 120
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Whoever, without right enters or remains in or upon the dwelling house, buildings, boats or improved or enclosed land, wharf, or pier of another, or enters or remains in a school bus, as defined in section 1 of chapter 90, after having been forbidden so to do by the person who has lawful control of said premises, whether directly or by notice posted thereon, or in violation of a court order pursuant to section thirty-four B of chapter two hundred and eight or section three or four of chapter two hundred and nine A, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than thirty days or both such fine and imprisonment. Proof that a court has given notice of such a court order to the alleged offender shall be prima facie evidence that the notice requirement of this section has been met. A person who is found committing such trespass may be arrested by a sheriff, deputy sheriff, constable or police officer and kept in custody in a convenient place, not more than twenty-four hours, Sunday excepted, until a complaint can be made against him for the offence, and he be taken upon a warrant issued upon such complaint.

It isn't much of a penalty but unless this statute has changed (?) it is still the law in MA. Politely I ask, am I wrong?[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][/FONT][/FONT]
 
as i read that, it does not apply to firearms specifically and it's more of a "i already told you once, now GTFO"... it's more of a trespass thing.

someone correct me if i am wrong.
 
atilla said:
except that 1911s are kewl. <3
Click to expand...
Exactly.

wimsey1 said:
Part IV, Title I, Chpt 266 Section 120
Whoever, without right enters or remains in or upon the dwelling house, buildings, boats or improved or enclosed land, wharf, or pier of another, or enters or remains in a school bus, as defined in section 1 of chapter 90, after having been forbidden so to do by the person who has lawful control of said premises, whether directly or by notice posted thereon, or in violation of a court order pursuant to section thirty-four B of chapter two hundred and eight or section three or four of chapter two hundred and nine A, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than thirty days or both such fine and imprisonment. Proof that a court has given notice of such a court order to the alleged offender shall be prima facie evidence that the notice requirement of this section has been met. A person who is found committing such trespass may be arrested by a sheriff, deputy sheriff, constable or police officer and kept in custody in a convenient place, not more than twenty-four hours, Sunday excepted, until a complaint can be made against him for the offence, and he be taken upon a warrant issued upon such complaint.

It isn't much of a penalty but unless this statute has changed (?) it is still the law in MA. Politely I ask, am I wrong?
Click to expand...
I thought I had read something to that effect before. IF it's posted, it's legally binding IF they want to make a stink. With how MA is for things, such an even could either get your LTC revoked, or put you onto the unfit list.

JWPaolilliJr said:
Some states do have binding signage. Ma. and New Hampshire do not. Oh, Like I have said before, I won't go to these places. "You have a problem with my firearm, then you have a problem with my money". And with that I have no problem. Folks keep supporting these places when they are shoving it up your ass, You must like it.
Click to expand...

With what the prices are like to go even to a matinee showing, these days, they must REALLY like taking it. It's been many years since I went into a movie theater, and got sticker shock even then. You can't tell me that it costs them that much more to get the movies in (for ticket prices) or costs that much more to actually show the movie. As for the cost of food/snacks there. Charging over 4x what the exact same thing costs at the grocery store is highway robbery. They could be charging even more for all I know. Considering how little the stuff costs them (even with the overhead of people) they are making money hand over fist. Or fist up your ass.
 
Mass, NH does not have binding signage, for the 9,000 the time. It doesn't matter how loud the sign is. either. You must be asked to leave the premises and you are only in violation if trespass if you refuse.

-Mike
 
atilla said:
signage in MA is not legally binding, period. it's merely a suggestion. you are breaking no laws carrying unless it's already a place you can't carry such as a federal building, school, etc.


if discovered rest assured the cops will show up and you'll have to leave. if asked to leave and you don't, you're now trespassing and NOW you're guilty of something in a legal sense.


if you live in a super-anti town you might get charged with something, but that's unlikely and a decent lawyer would shoot the charges full of holes. pun intended. if you're a dick to the responding officers in an anti town expect to leave in bracelets.


wikommen zu amerika/massachusetts.
Click to expand...


Atilla is perfectly right (except that he cannot spell in german, but you get the idea anyway). And the bold part is critical - when they ask you to leave, you must do so or you will get in real legal trouble.


One thing he should have added is that whether you get charged or not, if the issuing PD learns about your concealed weapon being visible, they could use that to pull your LTC based on suitability.


wimsey1 said:
Part IV, Title I, Chpt 266 Section 120
Whoever, without right enters or remains in or upon the dwelling house, buildings, boats or improved or enclosed land, wharf, or pier of another, or enters or remains in a school bus, as defined in section 1 of chapter 90, after having been forbidden so to do by the person who has lawful control of said premises, whether directly or by notice posted thereon, or in violation of a court order pursuant to section thirty-four B of chapter two hundred and eight or section three or four of chapter two hundred and nine A, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than thirty days or both such fine and imprisonment. Proof that a court has given notice of such a court order to the alleged offender shall be prima facie evidence that the notice requirement of this section has been met. A person who is found committing such trespass may be arrested by a sheriff, deputy sheriff, constable or police officer and kept in custody in a convenient place, not more than twenty-four hours, Sunday excepted, until a complaint can be made against him for the offence, and he be taken upon a warrant issued upon such complaint.


It isn't much of a penalty but unless this statute has changed (?) it is still the law in MA. Politely I ask, am I wrong?
Click to expand...


A no concealed carry sign is not equivalent to the notice (posted sign or direct notification) required under the section above. That is for properties clearly posted with no trespassing signs, people who were specifically banned from a private property, etc. IANAL, so take it with a grain of salt.
 
my limited german is very rusty.

i suppose i should learn more the way the country is going.

at least i know to stay about the dudes who go: "papieren, bitte. schnell."
 
WatchCityCPA said:
One thing he should have added is that whether you get charged or not, if the issuing PD learns about your concealed weapon being visible, they could use that to pull your LTC based on suitability.
Click to expand...

This is a non problem, because if you leave when/if asked, no police will show up and that's the end of the story.

-Mike

- - - Updated - - -

[cerberus];3117793 said:
Anyone have a quick answer for Maine? Just curious.
Click to expand...

Maine only has binding signage for certain kinds of establishments that serve alcohol. Beyond that there is NO binding signage.

-Mike
 
wimsey1 said:
It is my understanding that "no gun" signs do carry force of law in Massachusetts and are not merely "suggestions." Is this incorrect? I have made the decision to carry in such places anyway as have most of you, but it is a decision informed by the consequences of breaking that law.
Click to expand...

You're fine. These threads get started every so often to point out how stupid the sheep are. On private property, you're not breaking any law by carrying. All they can do is ask you to leave if they somehow figure out you're armed. You will have a problem if you refuse to leave because then you'll be trespassing.

BTW, this applies to MA. In some states, signs like that may be binding.

ETA: Once again, I was late in replying. [smile]
 
atilla said:
signage in MA is not legally binding, period. it's merely a suggestion. ...if you live in a super-anti town you might get charged with something, but that's unlikely and a decent lawyer would shoot the charges full of holes. pun intended. if you're a dick to the responding officers in an anti town expect to leave in bracelets.
Click to expand...
I still disagree with this. A conspicuously placed sign stating "no firearms allowed on premesis" is a conditional permission to enter--the condition being you have no guns. If you don't abide by said condition, you are not permitted to enter and thus become common law trespasser. You don't need to be asked to leave--the sign was the 266/120 notice.

Now, the $1,000,000 question is whether a cop would arrest on this without you first being asked to leave. I think it's 99% no. But I think you can be charged, and possibly have your LTC revoked depending on how blatant the violation.

I'll always agree concealed means concealed, but property owners have the right to exclude and if those rights are not enforced by government, they become nothing but aspirational theory.
 
Last edited:
atilla said:
as i read that, it does not apply to firearms specifically and it's more of a "i already told you once, now GTFO"... it's more of a trespass thing.

someone correct me if i am wrong.
Click to expand...

This is correct. It's not illeagal to carry in those places, but like the garden, they can hit you with trespassing should you not comply. But if they find out you have a weapon visible, you have a whole other slew of issues. But yeah, this is correct in concept.


Sent from my god awful iPhone using Tapatalk 2
 
OfficerObie59 said:
I still disagree with this. A conspicuously placed sign stating "no firearms allowed on premesis" is a conditional permission to enter--the condition being you have no guns. If you don't abide by said condition, you are not permitted to enter and thus become common law trespasser. You don't need to be asked to leave--the sign was the 266/120 notice.

Now, the $1,000,000 question is whether a cop would arrest on this without you first being asked to leave. I think it's 99% no. But I think you can be charged, and possibly have your LTC revoked depending on how blatant the violation.

I'll always agree concealed means concealed, but property owners have the right to exclude and if those rights are not enforced by government, they become nothing but aspirational theory.
Click to expand...

Would you say "Move along" or just arrest the guy immediately for trespassing?
 

Similar threads

SWAT Under Siege movie
Replies
6
Views
218
Bt74
Bt74
Woman Shoots Home Intruder Who Interrupted Taylor Swift Movie
Replies
14
Views
341
Tigerstripe
T
What are the stages of the LTC application?
Replies
15
Views
85
beltedKingFisher
B
Are lower 80% prohibited in MA...yet?
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
EJFudd
EJFudd
MUST WATCH IF YOU ARE SELLING OR PLANNING TO SELL A FIREARM AND ARE NOT AN FFL
Replies
19
Views
585
Bigfudge16
Bigfudge16
Back
Top Bottom