Yup. While legally the most they could do is have me arrested for trespassing,
This is the part worth discussing. There are many carriers that ignore "no guns" signs because they feel that the business would have to individually ask them to leave, and then the carrier refuse, for a trespass charge to be brought. In essence that a sign is not sufficient notice of the owner's rules for entrance onto their property.
I'm curious as to whether these same people would ignore a "pro gun" sign as not being sufficient notice as to the owner's wishes and seek individual permission.
I'm also curious as to the differences in these two scenarios:
1)
OCer without CPL is carrying in a place restricted in 750.234d BUT that has a prominent sign on the door welcoming lawful OC.
Officer sees OCer and asks if they have a CPL or permission to be on premises. OCer directs officer to the sign on the door welcoming OCers.
Should the officer take the sign as express permission from the owner and let the OCer go?
2)
OCer is carrying into a business that has a prominent sign prohibiting firearm possession.
Officer sees OCer entering business and sees sign prohibiting firearms possession.
Should the officer take the sign as an express prohibition from the owner and detain/arrest OCer?
If yes/no to one and not the other...why?
Bronson