ArizonaShooting.com

While at my friendly neighborhood department of economic security office, they have a collection of "No Weapons" signs, none of them look like anything I usually see at restaurants or bars.

That said, they all have the ARS 13-3102.01 listed on them.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us


So I asked the clerk, and he gave me a dumb-founded look when I ask where the storage for my sidearm is, so I can check it while I am there. Then he looked at me big eyed and asked, "Do you have a gun on you" to which I replied I didn't, but told him if I did, I would like to know where the storage so I can lock it up while there.

He called HR, and gave me a non-answer. So I called the state office of the DES, and was given the run around.

Here's a pic I took for good measure.



I plan on calling back tomorrow and see how much farther I can take it.

Maybe I'm missing something, but what is illegal about these signs? They are not required to look like the ones you see in restaurants unless the Economic Security Office is serving alcohol.

There is nothing illegal about that sign. The only signage that has specific requirements deals with 4-244 and 4-229, the alcohol in restaurants thing.

They are, however, in violation of 13-3102.01. Further, their own signage says that a storage locker/facility is available. Oops.

The problem is that the law has no teeth, nor does it say that "if they don't have storage available, you can ignore this sign".

I agree 100%

You might agree with the selective quote, but it isn't what I wrote.

The law says they have to have storage lockers (which they seem to, according to the sign). However, there is nothing in the law that allows or permits disregarding the sign in the event they do not have lockers.

If you get caught, you'll get in trouble. If they get "caught", nothing happens.

If you want to ignore signs on government buildings, that's fine. But don't go insinuating that I said it was OK. It's not. It's against the law, irrespective of whether or not that DES office has, or offers, lockers.

Well of coarse it's not what u wrote, was just playing with your words thats all.

No need to get butt hurt about it, just joking around, had i known you were so sinsitive about your words i wouldnt have touched them.

For most things, I don't care. But when it comes to state gun laws, I do, because violating them (even if you didn't mean to) can f*** up someone's life in any number of ways.

#1.What the f*** does this mean, sounds like you want to tell us a story?

#2 Everybodey on this board saw it as a poor atempt at humor using a choped up peice of your quote.

There is no story. Violating government bans on guns in their buildings never ends well.

To say "everybody saw it as a poor attempt at humor" is a mighty broad statement. We'll leave it at that.

If you wish to discuss this further, then take it to PM. I don't wish to derail this thread any more than it has already been taken off course.

No lockers. It just blows me away that they would post signs, and yet be so hippo critical, why wouldn't a government agency follow their own laws; or at least know which law to follow?

Because they are a government agency, they don't follow any laws, they feel they are above teh laws. Just look at our current politicians.

I'm not surprised at all. I've done a lot of work over the years for and with Government Agencies from City Agencies all the way to Federal and they all do the absolute minimum in order to keep their jobs. It doesn't help that a lot of them are Unionized as you'll never get rid of a Union worker unless they drink on the job or kill somebody and maybe not even then.

I'm about to do a 15 minute fix for a problem someone else created in Washington D.C. and I told the Feds what the problem was and that it was a 15 minute fix in November of 2010. I even offered to do it for free.

They've been having meetings and discussion groups and think tanks and been looking over my proposed fix (I submitted in writing in the form they demanded and that they don't understand since it's a fix that's in a proprietary version of C Language) ever since and finally called me last week and said "okay, we're ready to have you fix it now.

So, what I originally said I'd do for free now will cost them $1,500.00 plus all the wasted time they had in meetings for the last 6 months. All in all, it's probably a $100K fix.

Flash

I was once told you haven't seen wastefulness (of anything) until you have seen government wastefulness.

It's not there money and no can/does anything about it. So what's stopping them?

See, I can do it with your words:



How do you like that? Those are your words.

Point being, not a good idea - ever - to take someone's words out of context and "quote them". Even more so when it's dealing with a legal matter.



Back on track though - TimW, do you know if AZCDL has any bills they are working on to modify the law regarding firearm storage - either to make it legal to take them in, or provide a penalty for non-compliance?

Not directly, though I know it's been discussed quite a bit among the BOD members. It wouldn't surprise me if something like that was in the works.