Big legal sign on door to the City of Ramsey, which is in Anoka County. I asked the desk lady after finishing my business, if she felt safer with that sign since a criminal won't obey it. She said no but it's not her decision.

Will update gunfreezones.com

Actually, it's not a legal sign; cities can't restrict carry, beyond what's allowed in the law; they're not private businesses.

It would be nice if "we" (or some organization) had a very nice letter that would explain the law (perhaps written by an atty) and could be sent to these places that are posted illegaly.

Not written by an attorney, but:

Dear Sir:

As I understand it, you, in your capacity as [name of person's job] are a government employee, working for the government of [name of city or other governmental entity.]

Minn. Stat. 624.714 states, in relevant part (emphasis added):

Subd. 17. Posting; trespass. (a) A person carrying a firearm on or
about his or her person or clothes under a permit or otherwise who
remains at a private establishment knowing that the operator of
the establishment or its agent has made a reasonable request that
firearms not be brought into the establishment may be ordered to leave
the premises..."Private establishment" means a building, structure, or
portion thereof that is owned, leased, controlled, or operated by a
nongovernmental entity for a nongovernmental purpose.

The sign [describe sign] posted at [name of public establishment]
is, on its face, an attempt to create this "reasonable request", as per
Minn. State. 624.714. However, [name of public establishment] is not
a "private establishment." It's a govermental establishment.

Further: Subd. 23 of the referenced Minn. Stat. says, in relevant part: "No sheriff, police chief, governmental unit, government official, government employee, or other person or body acting under color of law or governmental authority may change, modify, or supplement these criteria or procedures, or limit the exercise of a permit to carry."

As [name of public establishment] is a governmental unit, the rules
for posting of private establishments appear not to apply, and the
posting at [name of public establishment] appears, on its face, to be
an attempt by a "person or body acting under color of law of or
governmental authority" to "change, modify, or supplement" the
criteria and procedures specified in Minn. Stat. 624.714.

Could you explain to me what you believe is your legal basis for doing so?

Thanks in advance for your prompt reply.

I know that we have several attorneys who are Forum members; I'd appreciate any, err, informal suggestions (I'm not asking for "legal advice") from them, or anybody else who has an opinion, on the above draft.

INAL-
While I see the need to get a reply (as they could just dump the letter in the trash), I think it's a little confrontational. Maybe work up a first letter that is just informative, then if they do not comply use a more confrontational letter.

(New to forums or never been to Packing.org's forums, INAL means I'm Not A Lawyer)

Yup; it is a little confrontational. Whether or not that's a good idea is, of course, something reasonable people can differ on.

I'm not sure it's likely to get dumped in the trash, though; suggestions of "acting under color of authority" are fairly big deals, particularly if there's the slightest hint (and the letter does very slightly hint) that that could be an issue in court at some point.

At a minimum, I'd expect that letter to be bucked up to the city attorney, who might or might not say something like, "You did WHAT? Take that sign down, before some lawyer hits us with a suit."

Oh -- I'm not a lawyer. Don't play one on television, either.

And I think it's too non-confrontational.

I'd address the letter to the city/county attorney, and make it say something more like:

The posting of the sign is in clear violation of the state law above. I am confident that you, as an officer of the court and counsel to the [government entity], will want to take immediate action to ensure your client's adherence to the law by strongly recommending the removal of the sign.

See? There's where people can disagree. I wouldn't want to tell the city/county attorney to connect the dots -- I'd much rather have one of the people he doesn't want to have to go to court to argue for help him connect the dots.

That said, faxing a copy of the letter to the city/county attorney wouldn't be a bad idea. IMHO, and all.

Just as a point of information, the Ramsey County Attorney is Susan
Gaertner, and her fax number -- posted on their website -- is 651.266.3010.

I guess my overall point is that words are black and white and everyone gets different intentions or meanings when they read them. So, I would try to be obviously nice, then increase the pressure. To me, jumping right on (in this case) the sheriff might put you on his shit list. Joel, since you are a promenient figure in MN's carry circle, you are probably already on every list. But, for an average joe....

Maybe it's just those words in your example that seem harsh. Is there a nicer way to say the same thing? I'm thinking of it as (almost) the open carry issue. Something to work up to so people get used to it slowly. Do you want this guy to throw his weight around to try to get any carry-related bills defeated?

Actually, I've got what I think of as an open and cordial relationship with all of the law enforcement folks -- and politicians -- that I talk with, and every conversation I've had with deputies in both Ramsey and Hennepin (and I've been, I think, fairly critical of the sheriffs in both counties, but I don't think I've ever had more than a "Hi, how are you?" conversation with either) fall into that category.

(That said, I'm not sure how prominent I am, but that's another issue.)

When it comes to people who I don't think are capable of having an open and cordial relationship with me -- Senator Wesley "Skogie" Skoglund, for example -- I simply avoid them, if at all possible. I don't think Skogie and I are, ever going to be great friends, alas.

But that certainly isn't true for all the folks I'd classify as political adversaries -- I can't remember an unpleasant conversation -- in person or via email, with Nora Slawik -- for example, and as I'm sure Nora would agree, I even helped facilitate an on-camera interview she did with the Mercury Group, and -- as I don't think is a secret -- when it comes to matters involving the MCPPA, I doubt that Nora and I could possibly disagree more than we do.

(Somewhat after the, err, unpleasantness of May 17th, Nora emailed me, politely asking for an update on what was going on in the investigation into the forged emails, and I both told her everything that I could then, and later alerted her to my public announcement of the BCA having sent in a filing against the guy who they had served with a search warrant -- the one that they believe sent the emails.)

That said, when dealing with public officials on official matters, I think there's room for some formality.

HEY WAIT! This is the city of Ramsey in Anoka county not Ramsey county http://www.ci.ramsey.mn.us/

* Bump