Jump to content
click23

Signage requirements

Recommended Posts

As of January 1st, 2018 there is now only one allowable signage.  There is an exemption for signs that were in place prior to 1/1/2015, that under previous version of the law one of the option allowed a simple circle and slash, with a gun in the middle, to prohibit guns. 

Here is the current law:

https://advance.lexis.com/documentpage/?pdmfid=1000516&crid=51b62872-f3f0-4b19-85f3-7e8cb5976912&nodeid=ABNAAOAANABL&scrollreferenceid=&config=025054JABlOTJjNmIyNi0wYjI0LTRjZGEtYWE5ZC0zNGFhOWNhMjFlNDgKAFBvZENhdGFsb2cDFQ14bX2GfyBTaI9WcPX5&pddocfullpath=%2Fshared%2Fdocument%2Fstatutes-legislation%2Furn%3AcontentItem%3A50J2-V4S0-R03M-D4H3-00008-00&ecomp=-kc_kkk&prid=2a1c4777-b6c7-442a-bd4e-4d8a874ac0a6

 

TCA § 39-17-1359:

 

(b)(1)  Notice of the prohibition permitted by subsection (a) shall be accomplished by displaying the notice described in subdivision (b)(3) in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited. The notice shall be plainly visible to the average person entering the building, property, or portion of the building or property, posted.

(2)  The notice required by this section shall be in English, but a duplicate notice may also be posted in any language used by patrons, customers, or persons who frequent the place where weapon possession is prohibited.

(3)(A)  A sign shall be used as the method of posting. The sign shall include the phrase "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED", and the phrase shall measure at least one inch (1") high and eight inches (8") wide. The sign shall also include the phrase "As authorized by T.C.A. § 39-17-1359".

(B)  The sign shall include a pictorial representation of the phrase "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED" that shall include a circle with a diagonal line through the circle and an image of a firearm inside the circle under the diagonal line. The entire pictorial representation shall be at least four inches (4") high and four inches (4") wide. The diagonal line shall be at a forty-five degree (45 degrees) angle from the upper left to the lower right side of the circle.

(4)  An individual, corporation, business entity, or government entity that, as of January 1, 2015, used signs to provide notice of the prohibition permitted by subsection (a) shall have until January 1, 2018, to replace existing signs with signs that meet the requirements of subdivision (b)(3).

 

Based on my reading this sign would meet the state law(assuming the letter height meets the law)

tennessee-gun-control-sign-s2-0646-tn.png

 

And these would not, the first does not state "No Firearms Allowed" and the second and third have none of the required text:

Image result for As authorized by T.C.A. § 39-17-1359

Banned-guns-sign-e1476976656688-300x255.jpg

1823D__36618.1485713638.190.250.jpg?c=2

 

 

**I am not a lawyer, this is just a layman's interpretation of the law and not legal advice.  Please use your best judgement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something that I forgot to post was that this only applies to private property, government owned property has similar requirements, but they are several exemptions and most properties require a metal detector and a trained operator, and mandatory bag searches for the signs to apply to handgun carry permit holders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know what the laws state in regards to locations with multiple entrances?  For instance this past weekend at the Williamson Co. Fair I came in through one entrance that was not posted and upon exiting I noticed that entrance was posted.  I have noticed the same thing on other locations as well, just wanted to get an opinion or perhaps an excerpt from the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Law clearly states all entrances.  If there's a door with no sign, that's the door you entered.  :)

Cheers,

Whisper

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whisper said:

Law clearly states all entrances. .

Not exactly.

"...in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited or restricted. "

- OS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Oh Shoot said:

Not exactly.

"...in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited or restricted. "

- OS

So, how do you interpret this as saying that "all entrances" doesn't mean "all entrances"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't say "all entrances". It says " all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property " etc. A backdoor for employees or truck delivery bay for example, might not be posted, but that doesn't mean it's OK to circumvent the valid postings on the regular entrances by entering through those areas. They're entrances, but not entrances primarily used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Whisper said:

So, how do you interpret this as saying that "all entrances" doesn't mean "all entrances"?

"all entrances primarily used..." is not the same as "all entrances" period.

"All people who have two legs" does not equal "all people".  Words and logic and like that sort of thang.

- OS

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, it means any entrance intended to be used by patrons of the business.  So unless it's a restricted access entrance, it should be posted if that is their intent.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty rare one is charged for carrying past signs, not to excuse the act.  I would certainly be interested in hearing reliable incidents.  As far as sign wording, may be a technicality to avoid charges or having them dismissed.  However, any sign notes the attitude of the owner and I personally would treat it with the same respect and avoid doing business there is possible.  Another example is posting at some malls.  Primary entrances may be signed, but most private stores which access the main mall are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, chances R said:

Pretty rare one is charged for carrying past signs, not to excuse the act.  I would certainly be interested in hearing reliable incidents.  As far as sign wording, may be a technicality to avoid charges or having them dismissed.  However, any sign notes the attitude of the owner and I personally would treat it with the same respect and avoid doing business there is possible.  Another example is posting at some malls.  Primary entrances may be signed, but most private stores which access the main mall are not.

I normally look for a sign, technically correct or not, and avoid going into these businesses if possible.  I figure if they don't want my business, someone else does.  Even if I happen to not be carrying at the time I avoid posted places, no sense giving these places my money.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Omega said:

I normally look for a sign, technically correct or not, and avoid going into these businesses if possible.  I figure if they don't want my business, someone else does.  Even if I happen to not be carrying at the time I avoid posted places, no sense giving these places my money.

I'm with you on the doing business with businesses and signs. If I am packing or not, if they are posted they are teling me they don't want my business and their are many others that do so I just move along to someone that appreciates my business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, the Williamson County Fair most likely can not be posted since it would most likely fall under the 39-17-1311 exception to posting.  The fair grounds are clearly recreational.  So the signs would have been meant for 'non-permit holders'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be a legal posting IF. IF. IF metal detectors and bag inspection at all entrances.

39-17-1359 (g1)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2018 at 4:02 PM, Oh Shoot said:

"all entrances primarily used..." is not the same as "all entrances" period.

"All people who have two legs" does not equal "all people".  Words and logic and like that sort of thang.

- OS

Like manners make a man, commas make a sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, btq96r said:

Like manners make a man, commas make a sentence.

Yep, the meaning of the 2nd Amendment has been debated over the use of commas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Footer title

This content can be configured within your theme settings in your ACP. You can add any HTML including images, paragraphs and lists.

Footer title

This is an example of a list.

Footer title

This content can be configured within your theme settings in your ACP. You can add any HTML including images, paragraphs and lists.

Footer title

This content can be configured within your theme settings in your ACP. You can add any HTML including images, paragraphs and lists.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines