TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

steveincowtown wrote:

Reds45ACP wrote: Not on the list but it would be nice: Stricter rules regarding the placement of 30.06 and 51% signs. I will happily obey these but I hate going places where they are placed in some out of the way location where I am already into an establishment and breaking the rules.

Hey if we a dreaming here, eliminate 30.06, and have the law written so that Gun Busters signs mean nothing, except that you may be asked to leave the property if seen with a gun. If you do not leave the property it would be a simple (non firearms related) trespass charge.

This would be similar to what some other states have, and would set us up for success with Open Carry in future sessions.

Although I understand what the thinking was at the time (or at least believe I do) 30.06 has run its course and will need be eliminated or majorly retrofitted for us to move forward on other issues.

30.06 is not outdated by any stretch of the imagination. It literately saved the CHL program and it still does today. It also prevents governmental agencies from banning armed CHL's from entering government owned property.

Also, the legislature would never support a bill that made it impossible to prohibit people from entering private property, forcing property owners to verbally tell each and every person they don't want on their property to leave. We have two choices, TPC §30.05 (any sign works) or TPC §30.06 (nothing but the "big ugly sign" works).

Chas.