From my Permit to Carry Instructor..
The one whom said, “If you have a permit to carry, then carry it!”
And I always do what my instructors tell me!!
IMPORTANT: SPECIAL UPDATE ON STATE V. YANG
On June 18, 2012, the Minnesota Court of Appeals released its opinion
in State v. Yang. Officers were investigating Yang after receiving a
report that he was in the front yard of a residence with a handgun, in
violation of Minn. Stat. 624.714 – prohibiting individuals other than
peace officers from carrying a pistol in a public place without a
permit. At issue in the case was whether the front yard of a St. Paul
residence was a “public place” within the meaning of the handgun laws.
The court held it was not.
Strictly interpreting the language of Minn. Stat. 624.7181, the court
held that a public place is: “(1) property that is governmentally
owned, leased, or controlled, and (2) private property that has been
dedicated to the public for its use.” As to this latter category, the
court indicated that private space must be “dedicated to and accepted
by the public for public use.” Therefore, while the yard Yang was
found in may have been accessible to the public, it was not
governmentally owned nor dedicated to public use. The court
invalidated the officer’s stop of Yang because they lacked evidence he
had been in a public place.
The decision in Yang has far-reaching consequences, as it indicates
the statutory prohibition against carrying a handgun without a permit
is limited to what most of us would recognize by common sense to be
public property; e.g., streets, sidewalks, parks, trails, ball fields
and the like. Yang strongly suggests that areas like bars, clubs,
restaurants, hotels, retail establishments, and places of
entertainment, and the like (privately owned) establishments are not
covered by the handgun permit requirement. Because of the confusion
this decision will leave in its wake, it is reasonable to expect
further litigation or legislative efforts at clarification. Until
then, however, Yang is a published decision and is binding precedent
in the State of Minnesota.
State v. Yang, No. A11-1008 (Minnesota Court of Appeals, June 18, 2012).