Coronavirus pandemic

[NWI_Irish96]

Isn't it a general rule that a person on private property without lawful excuse must be offered an opportunity to "cure trespass" before he or she is arrested?

The first time, yes. How it generally works:
Property owner asks someone to leave
Person refuses to leave
Property owner calls police
Police order person to leave

At this point, the property owner has the option of just having the person leave, or having them ordered not to return. If they choose the latter, the next time the person shows up, an arrest can be made without warning. This of course also assumes that the person did not commit any crimes in the process of refusing to leave.

[bandit957]

Authoritarian measures are not a plan.

If the government is going to tell people they gotta do something, they should tell them they should stay OUTSIDE as much as possible, not inside. Then the government should provide the support for people to do it.

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

[webny99]

...
I wonder if Jimmy believes that if I walked around without a shirt or shoes on that enforcing that ordiance is unconstitutional as well? 

Cite your reference for claiming there is a shirt & shoes ordinance.  People say all the time that shirt and shoes are required by ordinance, but I know of no such state law*.  Local ordinances, perhaps.  Businesses requiring shirt and shoes do so by their own individual policies, not based on any supposed health code.  However, if a business refuses to serve someone because he isn't wearing shirt or shoes, and then that person refuses to leave, the police could get involved as a matter of trespassing.

Shirt and shoes requirements are comparable to mask wearing in the sense that no one really cares if you do it outside of indoor public places, but for those type of places it makes sense to do it (IMO, for the purpose of this discussion) regardless of whether there's a sign stating that you must or not.

In this area, signs at entry points to indoor public places stating face covering requirements are already much more common (and much more prominent) than shoes/shirt requirements signs ever were. There's one local grocery chain that's always had a small shoes/shirt requirement on their sliding doors, and all the Thruway rest areas have similar signs, but I can't think of too many places beyond that that bothered to post a sign - because, as you mentioned, it's the specific company requirement, not an ordinance.

[SEWIGuy]

Authoritarian measures are not a plan.

If the government is going to tell people they gotta do something, they should tell them they should stay OUTSIDE as much as possible, not inside. Then the government should provide the support for people to do it.

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Telling people to wear a mask isn't "authoritarian."

[webny99]

it's still important to have at least some degree of current events awareness.

I've begun to question the importance of that.  I never really much followed the news until just a few years ago, and I'm almost 39 years old.  When I think back to 15-20 years ago, it was a time in which I had no TV service, no internet at home or on my phone, and no newspaper subscription.  Am I happier now than I was back then because I'm more aware of current events?  No, I can't say that I am.  Do I think I'm more of a well-rounded individual by following the news?  Maybe slightly, but not much.

I remember 2016 as the year I started following the news in some form or fashion. I find data and statistics fascinating (as many here no doubt know already), so I was much more interested in that aspect of the election than the politics or the candidates, and that's kind of stuck ever since.

I think the reasons it's important to be aware of current events are social and contextual, not so much practical or because it will make you a better person. I don't want to be that guy that's totally clued out and/or misses something important that happens.

[Roadgeekteen]

it's still important to have at least some degree of current events awareness.

I've begun to question the importance of that.  I never really much followed the news until just a few years ago, and I'm almost 39 years old.  When I think back to 15-20 years ago, it was a time in which I had no TV service, no internet at home or on my phone, and no newspaper subscription.  Am I happier now than I was back then because I'm more aware of current events?  No, I can't say that I am.  Do I think I'm more of a well-rounded individual by following the news?  Maybe slightly, but not much.

I remember 2016 as the year I started following the news in some form or fashion. I find data and statistics fascinating (as many here no doubt know already), so I was much more interested in that aspect of the election than the politics or the candidates, and that's kind of stuck ever since.

I think the reasons it's important to be aware of current events are social and contextual, not so much practical or because it will make you a better person. I don't want to be that guy that's totally clued out and/or misses something important that happens.

Hey same with me! Maybe something important happened in 2016...

[kphoger]

"Sampson County Sheriff Jimmy Thornton wrote that he believes Cooper's order is unconstitutional and unenforceable."

I wonder if Jimmy believes that if I walked around without a shirt or shoes on that enforcing that ordiance is unconstitutional as well?  Seriously we are run by idiots.

Cite your reference for claiming there is a shirt & shoes ordinance.  People say all the time that shirt and shoes are required by ordinance, but I know of no such state law*.  Local ordinances, perhaps.  Businesses requiring shirt and shoes do so by their own individual policies, not based on any supposed health code.  However, if a business refuses to serve someone because he isn't wearing shirt or shoes, and then that person refuses to leave, the police could get involved as a matter of trespassing.


*  Except, of course, for state nudity laws that apply only to women.

My point is that such an ordinance would not be unconstitutional.

Gotcha.  Yeah, that's what I get for skimming posts.

Also, it isn't the Executive branch of the government that's responsible for deciding constitutionality.  That is to say, even if a law violates the Constitution, it's still the police's job to enforce that law as written.

Isn't it a general rule that a person on private property without lawful excuse must be offered an opportunity to "cure trespass" before he or she is arrested?

I wonder if posted signs have any bearing on the answer to that question.  If you have signs on your property that state "No trespassing", can I be arrested for camping on it without first being given the opportunity to leave voluntarily?  Or is it the same regardless of posted notice?

[GaryV]

One thing I'm sick of is the phrase "in public" with regard to mask orders. For instance, news reports always say the mask order in Kentucky applies "in public." Nope. It applies at businesses, doctor's offices, etc. That's not the same as "in public."

What then do you consider "public"?  I'm sure that the places you've listed qualify as "public accommodations" in the eyes of civil rights laws disallowing discrimination. 

[kphoger]

One thing I'm sick of is the phrase "in public" with regard to mask orders. For instance, news reports always say the mask order in Kentucky applies "in public." Nope. It applies at businesses, doctor's offices, etc. That's not the same as "in public."

What then do you consider "public"?  I'm sure that the places you've listed qualify as "public accommodations" in the eyes of civil rights laws disallowing discrimination. 

Outdoor spaces are also "in public" but are typically excluded from such orders.

[kphoger]

Also, I cannot find any indication that Kentucky requires masks even in the locations described by bandit957.

[J N Winkler]

I've begun to question the importance of that.  I never really much followed the news until just a few years ago, and I'm almost 39 years old.  When I think back to 15-20 years ago, it was a time in which I had no TV service, no internet at home or on my phone, and no newspaper subscription.  Am I happier now than I was back then because I'm more aware of current events?  No, I can't say that I am.  Do I think I'm more of a well-rounded individual by following the news?  Maybe slightly, but not much.

Following the news in some form is not just a means of personal enrichment--it is also a way of engaging with the outside world.  Whether and how one does it comes down, I think, to values, preferences, and how one wishes to present oneself to others.

I have known people who have never picked up a newspaper and never watch TV news "because it is too upsetting."  Would I like to live like that?  No.  Do I condemn them?  I don't feel it's my place to do so.

I have known others who get all of their news from Fox News.  Same questions, same answers.

And I run across people who rely on Facebook and Twitter as their primary sources.  Again--same questions, same answers.

I decided long ago that I have zero interest in sports news.  I generally don't even see it except when it bleeds through into straight, non-sports coverage, as it did when the KC Chiefs won the Super Bowl.  Do I regret it?  Not really, but as I have gotten older, I have become more aware that there are tradeoffs--for example, other people whose interest in sports is superficial at best follow it anyway in order to have an entrée into water-cooler conversations where the topics may shift into areas of more interest to them.

[US 89]

Isn't it a general rule that a person on private property without lawful excuse must be offered an opportunity to "cure trespass" before he or she is arrested?

I wonder if posted signs have any bearing on the answer to that question.  If you have signs on your property that state "No trespassing", can I be arrested for camping on it without first being given the opportunity to leave voluntarily?  Or is it the same regardless of posted notice?

I've read that a posted sign is legally equivalent to a person physically telling you to leave the property.

[kphoger]

Another question is this:  Who has the right to tell you to leave the property?  The manager? a security guard? a cashier? a janitor?

For example, probably 13 years ago now, I was out around town (Herrin, IL) with my wife, and I didn't have shoes on.  We went into WalMart, and the greeter told me I couldn't be in the store without shoes.  There may or may not have been a sign on the front window saying shirt and shoes required, I can't remember.  Because my shoes were back at home, I ignored the greeter and we proceeded to shop.  If a WalMart greeter tells you to leave, does that constitute proper notice, or would someone else have to tell you?

I think the answers to these questions have bearing on the issue of face masks.  But I don't know the answers to them.

[NWI_Irish96]

Another question is this:  Who has the right to tell you to leave the property?  The manager? a security guard? a cashier? a janitor?

For example, probably 13 years ago now, I was out around town (Herrin, IL) with my wife, and I didn't have shoes on.  We went into WalMart, and the greeter told me I couldn't be in the store without shoes.  There may or may not have been a sign on the front window saying shirt and shoes required, I can't remember.  Because my shoes were back at home, I ignored the greeter and we proceeded to shop.  If a WalMart greeter tells you to leave, does that constitute proper notice, or would someone else have to tell you?

I think the answers to these questions have bearing on the issue of face masks.  But I don't know the answers to them.

Any employee can tell you to leave.

[Scott5114]

Another question is this:  Who has the right to tell you to leave the property?  The manager? a security guard? a cashier? a janitor?

In the absence of knowledge of the specifics of the corporate management structure, it should be assumed that any of these people have the right to do so. An employee is an agent of the company and thus speaks for the employer. If you accept a cashier telling you "Your total is $25.32" or "watch out, I just mopped, so the floor is slippery", you are accepting them as a mouthpiece for the employer. Different types of employees are delegated different tasks, but since you weren't in the meeting where they did that, you have no idea who management delegated what duties to.

That, and there's always the possibility of misidentifying an employee's position. If you go into the casino my mom works at, you can often find her mopping the floor. It would be reasonable to assume she's a janitor if you knew nothing about her. But she's actually management. She's over the housekeeping department, so she goes out to mop the floor sometimes when her employees are behind. Now, she wears business casual, so you may well identify her as a member of management. But asking people to leave is the job of the Operations department, which also wears business casual...

With the shoe thing there is also an aspect of liability for the business. If you are told "don't enter without shoes", then go step on a broken glass in the Housewares department and sue the store, the business will be able to say "We warned him to wear shoes but he ignored the warning."

[cl94]

For example, probably 13 years ago now, I was out around town (Herrin, IL) with my wife, and I didn't have shoes on.  We went into WalMart, and the greeter told me I couldn't be in the store without shoes.  There may or may not have been a sign on the front window saying shirt and shoes required, I can't remember.  Because my shoes were back at home, I ignored the greeter and we proceeded to shop.

So you're one of those people... 

[corco]

Another question is this:  Who has the right to tell you to leave the property?  The manager? a security guard? a cashier? a janitor?

For example, probably 13 years ago now, I was out around town (Herrin, IL) with my wife, and I didn't have shoes on.  We went into WalMart, and the greeter told me I couldn't be in the store without shoes.  There may or may not have been a sign on the front window saying shirt and shoes required, I can't remember.  Because my shoes were back at home, I ignored the greeter and we proceeded to shop.  If a WalMart greeter tells you to leave, does that constitute proper notice, or would someone else have to tell you?

Stay classy, hoger.

[kphoger]

Another question is this:  Who has the right to tell you to leave the property?  The manager? a security guard? a cashier? a janitor?

In the absence of knowledge of the specifics of the corporate management structure, it should be assumed that any of these people have the right to do so. An employee is an agent of the company and thus speaks for the employer. If you accept a cashier telling you "Your total is $25.32" or "watch out, I just mopped, so the floor is slippery", you are accepting them as a mouthpiece for the employer. Different types of employees are delegated different tasks, but since you weren't in the meeting where they did that, you have no idea who management delegated what duties to.

That, and there's always the possibility of misidentifying an employee's position. If you go into the casino my mom works at, you can often find her mopping the floor. It would be reasonable to assume she's a janitor if you knew nothing about her. But she's actually management. She's over the housekeeping department, so she goes out to mop the floor sometimes when her employees are behind. Now, she wears business casual, so you may well identify her as a member of management. But asking people to leave is the job of the Operations department, which also wears business casual...

With the shoe thing there is also an aspect of liability for the business. If you are told "don't enter without shoes", then go step on a broken glass in the Housewares department and sue the store, the business will be able to say "We warned him to wear shoes but he ignored the warning."

Well, what I was really getting at is the question of what would legally constitute notice to leave a business because one wasn't wearing a mask.  I wasn't really asking about wearing shoes in WalMart, but only brought it up as an analogue.

So you're one of those people... 

A hippie?

But no, seriously, I haven't gone around barefoot in probably ten years.  My feet are weenies now.

Stay classy, hoger.

But WalMart.   

[Scott5114]

Another question is this:  Who has the right to tell you to leave the property?  The manager? a security guard? a cashier? a janitor?

In the absence of knowledge of the specifics of the corporate management structure, it should be assumed that any of these people have the right to do so. An employee is an agent of the company and thus speaks for the employer. If you accept a cashier telling you "Your total is $25.32" or "watch out, I just mopped, so the floor is slippery", you are accepting them as a mouthpiece for the employer. Different types of employees are delegated different tasks, but since you weren't in the meeting where they did that, you have no idea who management delegated what duties to.

That, and there's always the possibility of misidentifying an employee's position. If you go into the casino my mom works at, you can often find her mopping the floor. It would be reasonable to assume she's a janitor if you knew nothing about her. But she's actually management. She's over the housekeeping department, so she goes out to mop the floor sometimes when her employees are behind. Now, she wears business casual, so you may well identify her as a member of management. But asking people to leave is the job of the Operations department, which also wears business casual...

With the shoe thing there is also an aspect of liability for the business. If you are told "don't enter without shoes", then go step on a broken glass in the Housewares department and sue the store, the business will be able to say "We warned him to wear shoes but he ignored the warning."

Well, what I was really getting at is the question of what would legally constitute notice to leave a business because one wasn't wearing a mask.

The say-so of anyone acting in their capacity as an employee of the company.

[kphoger]

Wow!  I've never realized I had such authority as an employee.  It certainly never crossed my mind when I was pushing carts at Target that I could tell people to leave the store and have it be legally enforceable.

[NWI_Irish96]

Wow!  I've never realized I had such authority as an employee.  It certainly never crossed my mind when I was pushing carts at Target that I could tell people to leave the store and have it be legally enforceable.

It's absolutely legally enforceable, though it is likely to get you fired as well.

[jeffandnicole]

Another question is this:  Who has the right to tell you to leave the property?  The manager? a security guard? a cashier? a janitor?

For example, probably 13 years ago now, I was out around town (Herrin, IL) with my wife, and I didn't have shoes on.  We went into WalMart, and the greeter told me I couldn't be in the store without shoes.  There may or may not have been a sign on the front window saying shirt and shoes required, I can't remember.  Because my shoes were back at home, I ignored the greeter and we proceeded to shop.  If a WalMart greeter tells you to leave, does that constitute proper notice, or would someone else have to tell you?

I think the answers to these questions have bearing on the issue of face masks.  But I don't know the answers to them.

Doesn't matter if a sign is posted or not.  There isn't a sign saying "Don't pee on the tomatoes".  Are you going to fight an employee that catches you doing this?  Or are you going to head over to the fishing lures and poo?

However, that is the reason why we have "The stuff in here may be hot" on coffee cups and "Baby not included" on a box containing a playpen.  People ignore common sense and basic levels of safety, which include wearing shoes when in a business.  Because we all know that if you cut yourself on a piece of glass due to a broken bottle that your wife dropped moments before you moved out of the way and stepped on it, you would not tell the court that the greeter told you to wear shoes and you ignored that person because you didn't think the greeter had that authority to tell you that.

[wxfree]

Wow!  I've never realized I had such authority as an employee.  It certainly never crossed my mind when I was pushing carts at Target that I could tell people to leave the store and have it be legally enforceable.

It's absolutely legally enforceable, though it is likely to get you fired as well.

I would estimate (I don't have direct knowledge of this), that if a greeter tells you you're not allowed to be there, then when police are called, that notice serves as evidence that you were legally informed that you're trespassing.  It's "legally enforceable" in that way.  However, if the situation escalates to involve law enforcement, then higher-ups would know about it.  If the notice was given properly, it would likely have been restated by a superior.  If the notice was given wrongly, then it can be countermanded by a superior.  The employee would be fired if the act constituted abuse or severe indiscretion (or upset an important customer).

[J N Winkler]

I also wonder about the extent to which this varies from state to state.  In New York, according to an explainer I found in a casual Google search, trespassing is apparently illegal per se, but posting no-trespassing signs gives the landowner a higher standard of protection from liability.

And I also wonder about variation according to context.  In Kansas, for example, if you carry a gun and (without lawful excuse) enter a building that has a gun-free sign, you are considered to be trespassing, and that is all it is--there is no other offense attached to the act that relates specifically to firearms.

[kphoger]

Doesn't matter if a sign is posted or not.  There isn't a sign saying "Don't pee on the tomatoes".  Are you going to fight an employee that catches you doing this?  Or are you going to head over to the fishing lures and poo?

However, you can legally be in my front yard, so long as I don't have NO TRESPASSING signs posted.  If I come out of the house and tell you to get off my property, then that's another matter.

In fact, I believe one can legally pitch a tent and camp the night on someone's land if their NO TRESPASSING signs are posted too far apart to meet the legal requirements.  It's been a long time since I've looked up the laws regarding this stuff, though, so my memory is a bit fuzzy.

In such cases, it does matter if a sign is posted or not.

Here is the discussion we had about trespassing a few years ago, for reference.  Looks like I didn't cite any laws back then either.  Lazy me.