ARS 4-229

[Triphammer]

I know "No Guns" signs have been discussed at length, here but this on is specific to Arizona and the intentional misuse of the ARS 4-229. sign. These signs came into being  as the approved method for a bar/ restaurant owner to post his property after CCW holders were allowed to carry into bars but not drink. Wherever you stand on that issue is another discussion.
 What I'm talking about is that these signs have been appearing everywhere. I first noticed them on doctors offices then on pawn shops. I've been told that Az has a rule about signage, any sign,  traffic, parking, handicapped parking, it has to have to underlying ARS printed on it.
 Does anyone have any insitght or know of any case law pertaining to the use of the 4-229 sign?
Seems businesses used to use one that reference sate, town, city gov't but stopped when people realized that it required the entity supply lockers for the gun owners use.

[Scout26]

Could be what happened here in Illinois.  After CCW passed, a bunch of Do-Gooders took it upon themselves to go around and slap an IL specific Gun-Busters signs on every swingin' door they could find.

Upon questioning several businesses and business owners took them down.

[Firethorn]

Could be what happened here in Illinois.  After CCW passed, a bunch of Do-Gooders took it upon themselves to go around and slap an IL specific Gun-Busters signs on every swingin' door they could find.

You mean that they were putting signs up without the permission of the business's owners?

[Hawkmoon]

The statute (tried to format for clarity, indent tags don't work):

4-229. Licenses; handguns; posting of notice

A. A person may carry a concealed handgun on the premises of a licensee who is an on-sale retailer unless the licensee posts a sign that clearly prohibits the possession of weapons on the licensed premises. The sign shall conform to the following requirements:

1. Be posted in a conspicuous location accessible to the general public and immediately adjacent to the liquor license posted on the licensed premises.

2. Contain a pictogram that shows a firearm within a red circle and a diagonal red line across the firearm.

3. Contain the words, "no firearms allowed pursuant to A.R.S. section 4-229".

B. A person shall not carry a firearm on the licensed premises of an on-sale retailer if the licensee has posted the notice prescribed in subsection A of this section.

C. It is an affirmative defense to a violation of subsection B of this section if:

1. The person was not informed of the notice prescribed in subsection A of this section before the violation.

2. Any one or more of the following apply:

(a) At the time of the violation the notice prescribed in subsection A of this section had fallen down.

(b) At the time of the violation the person was not a resident of this state.

(c) The licensee had posted the notice prescribed in subsection A of this section not more than thirty days before the violation.

D. The department of liquor licenses and control shall prepare the signs required by this section and make them available at no cost to licensees.

E. The signs required by this section shall be composed of block, capital letters printed in black on white laminated paper at a minimum weight of one hundred ten pound index. The lettering and pictogram shall consume a space at least six inches by nine inches. The letters constituting the words "no firearms allowed" shall be at least three-fourths of a vertical inch and all other letters shall be at least one-half of a vertical inch. Nothing shall prohibit a licensee from posting additional signs at one or more locations on the premises.

F. This section does not prohibit a person who possesses a handgun from entering the licensed premises for a limited time for the specific purpose of either:

1. Seeking emergency aid.

2. Determining whether a sign has been posted pursuant to subsection A of this section.

Seems pretty clear that the entire sign law applies only to bars and restaurants that serve spirits. Aside from the requirement that the sign be posted near the liquor license (which may be in conflict with the requirement that it be placed in a conspicuous location), the law states that the department of liquor licenses and control "shall" prepare the signs. A plain reading of that requirement would be that a sign prepared by any other person or entity is invalid. And I can't see the liquor control board handing out signs to doctors' offices.

[Triphammer]

The statute is requiring TWO signs. One at the door or close to it, the other next to the liquor license. The random signs I've been seeing are not as described being a plastic laminate adhered to the door glass.
 In the case of my doctor's office, she said the sign showed up one day. She assumed someone from Corporate had placed it and she didn't give it another thought till I asked for a bourbon & water. She, personally, has no opinion on the matter.

[Scout26]

You mean that they were putting signs up without the permission of the business's owners?

Yep.

See Triphammer's doctor post.   

[Hawkmoon]

The statute is requiring TWO signs. One at the door or close to it, the other next to the liquor license.

How do you figure that? There is nothing in the statute to indicate a requirement for two signs. Everything is in the singular. "A sign," "the sign," etc. Additional signs are optional, not required.

[Triphammer]

You are correct. I somehow read a door sign into the mix but only the one next to the liquor license is required.

[Triphammer]

So, back to my  somewhat clouded original question;" Do these misused signs have force of law?" Would they be the first notice, after which a person would be committing trespass? And has there been any case law on the subject? I'd reseach it myself but have no idea where to start.

[Hawkmoon]

So, back to my  somewhat clouded original question;" Do these misused signs have force of law?" Would they be the first notice, after which a person would be committing trespass? And has there been any case law on the subject? I'd reseach it myself but have no idea where to start.

They clearly do not have any force of law under ARS 4-229. You would have to look at other statutes pertaining to trespass and notice to see if signs have legal standing under other statutes.