0
Usenet Posted 23 years ago
Usage
'In Accordance with Minnesota Law...'
The following is posted at the entrances to the Mall of America, the largest shopping mall in the US, located in Bloomington, Minnesota, near here:
(quote)
IN ACCORDANCE WITH
MINNESOTA LAW
MALL OF AMERICA
PROHIBITS GUNS
IN THESE PREMISES
(end quote)
Now, what do you take that to mean?
Another example of the same sort of sign is at the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome when the Minnesota Twins are playing:
(quote)
THE
MINNESOTA TWINS
PROHIBITS GUNS
IN THESE PREMISES
(end quote)
The law in question is one which prohibits businesses, museums, and churches from prohibiting guns on their premises unless they post the sign. Well, that's not quite right. The "in" in "in these premises is required: "on these premises" might imply that the person could not bring a gun into the parking lot, and business, museums, and churches may not prohibit that. (Churches are now in the process of suing the state.) Cities and counties are flatly not permitted to prohibit guns in city halls and other public buildings. (Some are doing so anyway, and some judges are prohibiting guns in their courtrooms. Whether this is legal will be decided when someone sues, I suppose.)Now, in your opinion, why does the Mall of America add the words "in accordance with Minnesota law"? My theory is that it is to keep the tourists happy, especially those who come in from the airport, shop at the mall, and leave without visiting anywhere else in the state. When they see "in accordance with Minnesota law," I believe they are meant to think "Well, these Minnesotans are certainly more civilized than the people of other states: They explicitly ban guns from their shopping malls." Whereas the truth is just about 180 degrees from that: Businesses are not permitted to ban guns unless they post the sign, and are not permitted to ban them from their parking lots at all.
And here's an interesting additional fact: The law appears to require not only the signs, but also that a person confronted in a business who has a gun be explicitly informed in person that guns are illegal. So anyone can take a gun into any business, museum, or church which has the posted sign and they are not breaking any laws or trespassing. It is only if they were to refuse to leave after being told that guns were prohibited that the police might be called on a trespassing charge.
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
(quote)
IN ACCORDANCE WITH
MINNESOTA LAW
MALL OF AMERICA
PROHIBITS GUNS
IN THESE PREMISES
(end quote)
Now, what do you take that to mean?
Another example of the same sort of sign is at the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome when the Minnesota Twins are playing:
(quote)
THE
MINNESOTA TWINS
PROHIBITS GUNS
IN THESE PREMISES
(end quote)
The law in question is one which prohibits businesses, museums, and churches from prohibiting guns on their premises unless they post the sign. Well, that's not quite right. The "in" in "in these premises is required: "on these premises" might imply that the person could not bring a gun into the parking lot, and business, museums, and churches may not prohibit that. (Churches are now in the process of suing the state.) Cities and counties are flatly not permitted to prohibit guns in city halls and other public buildings. (Some are doing so anyway, and some judges are prohibiting guns in their courtrooms. Whether this is legal will be decided when someone sues, I suppose.)Now, in your opinion, why does the Mall of America add the words "in accordance with Minnesota law"? My theory is that it is to keep the tourists happy, especially those who come in from the airport, shop at the mall, and leave without visiting anywhere else in the state. When they see "in accordance with Minnesota law," I believe they are meant to think "Well, these Minnesotans are certainly more civilized than the people of other states: They explicitly ban guns from their shopping malls." Whereas the truth is just about 180 degrees from that: Businesses are not permitted to ban guns unless they post the sign, and are not permitted to ban them from their parking lots at all.
And here's an interesting additional fact: The law appears to require not only the signs, but also that a person confronted in a business who has a gun be explicitly informed in person that guns are illegal. So anyone can take a gun into any business, museum, or church which has the posted sign and they are not breaking any laws or trespassing. It is only if they were to refuse to leave after being told that guns were prohibited that the police might be called on a trespassing charge.
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Top answer
[nq:1]The following is posted at the entrances to the Mall of America, the largest shopping mall in the US, located ... [/nq] It's a strange law. The wording of the sign makes sense in light of the explanation.
- [nq:1]The following is posted at the entrances to the Mall of America, the largest shopping mall in the US, located ...
- [/nq] It's a strange law.
- The wording of the sign makes sense in light of the explanation.
- The sign doesn't say that Minnesota law prohibits guns, but that the proprietors of the mall do, and that by posting the sign, they are doing so in accordance with the law.
- I would think the wording is directed more toward future court encounters than at the reader.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
[nq:1]The following is posted at the entrances to the Mall of America, the largest shopping mall in the US, located ... refuse to leave after being told that guns were prohibited that the police might be called on a trespassing charge.[/nq]
It's a strange law. The wording of the sign makes sense in light of the explanation. The sign doesn't say that Minnesota law prohibits guns, but that the p
It's a strange law. The wording of the sign makes sense in light of the explanation. The sign doesn't say that Minnesota law prohibits guns, but that the p
00
[nq:2]The following is posted at the entrances to the Mall ... that the police might be called on a trespassing charge.[/nq]
[nq:1]It's a strange law. The wording of the sign makes sense in light of the explanation. The sign doesn't say ... more toward future court encounters than at the reader. It reminds me of signs that say 'Posted - no trespassing'.[/nq]
In fact, the whole point of the
[nq:1]It's a strange law. The wording of the sign makes sense in light of the explanation. The sign doesn't say ... more toward future court encounters than at the reader. It reminds me of signs that say 'Posted - no trespassing'.[/nq]
In fact, the whole point of the
00
[nq:1]I would think the wording is directed more toward future court encounters than at the reader. It reminds me of signs that say 'Posted - no trespassing'.[/nq]
"The right of Joe Bloggs to be considered the author of the following piece of trash is hereby asserted", or whatever they say.
Mike.
"The right of Joe Bloggs to be considered the author of the following piece of trash is hereby asserted", or whatever they say.
Mike.
00
[nq:1]largest[/nq]
{ snipped}
[nq:1]I can't see how there could be any possible legal ramifications of the words "in accordance with Minnesota law" being ... there were any legal ramifications, I would expect other businesses, as well as museums and churches, to follow their lead.[/nq]
There might not be ramifications, but the sign-posters might think there are. The qualification has a
{ snipped}
[nq:1]I can't see how there could be any possible legal ramifications of the words "in accordance with Minnesota law" being ... there were any legal ramifications, I would expect other businesses, as well as museums and churches, to follow their lead.[/nq]
There might not be ramifications, but the sign-posters might think there are. The qualification has a
0
Related Questions