another 30.06 question

The "What Works, What Doesn't," "Recommendations & Experiences"

Moderators: carlson1, Crossfire


Topic author
CZp10
Banned
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:39 am
Location: DFW

another 30.06 question

Postby CZp10 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:48 am

Sorry, I am new here (and to concealed carry), but I have a question that has been bothering me for some time. I have read through a number of threads on this topic, but I honestly don’t understand the complacency. I apologize for bringing this up again, but I am really struggling with this. Since I am new to all this, please let me know if I am misunderstanding anything, or just being dumb in general (my wife seems to think that happens a lot for some strange reason :smile: ).

Personally (and this is just my own opinion) I don’t have a problem with the requirements for a concealed carry permit, nor do I have a problem with people or businesses who do not want firearms on their private property. However, I can’t understand how the placing of a sign makes an otherwise completely law abiding citizen a forever recorded criminal for simply placing a foot inside a building open to all of the general public just they put up a discriminatory sign.

If someone is asked to leave, for any reason, from a private residence or a business they should leave and criminal penalties might ensue if they refuse. But how in the world are you automatically a criminal for being a law abiding citizen? There is a reason you can’t put up a sign saying “No (fill in the blank) People Allowed!”

I know there is the argument that 30.06 is the law, and if you don’t like it you should leave Texas. I honestly mean no offense, but this is a nonsensical argument. Every new law that has been enacted or changed over the millennia would never have been done if that argument made any sense.

The other argument is that you should just choose not to go anywhere with the sign up. This might work in some cities, but frankly I find this quite literally impossible. That would mean NEVER going to the movies, a very large number of grocery stores, any houses of worship, any and all zoos, amusement parks, or the like, toy stores, auto dealers, many restaurants, etc. Looking at texas3006 there are a huge number of locations with signs. It is in no way some small number of locations, it is a very significant inconvenience and extremely dangerous to anyone who has to unholster and lock up their firearm in a car every single time they go to any of these places.

The only thing I really have a problem with is that stepping one foot past a sign into any of a very large buildings in Texas makes any concealed carry person a de facto criminal, and that criminal record will follow them forever. They can put up signs, and they can ask you to leave, but you automatically being a criminal for walking through a door to a building open to the public seems utterly ridiculous.

30.06 seems unconstitutional, and I would very much like it challenged and taken as high in the court system as necessary. I don’t see the difference of putting up a sign for anything a business owner doesn’t like and you being a criminal if you enter the building. Can you put up a sign that says no democrats allowed, no Christians allowed, etc.?

Why are law enforcement exempt from carry weapons in posted businesses? The normal answer might be that they can be trusted with their weapons and concealed carry permit holders can’t. Either the training and requirements for concealed carry are adequate or they are not, either concealed carry is legal or it is not. If a business will not allow law abiding citizens, which the state has judged and permitted to concealed carry, to defend themselves and others, then they should be required to have trained, armed security guards at their business and metal detectors for everyone entering to keep out the bad guys (I realize that is never going to happen but hopefully you get my point).

Why has there been no fund setup to raise money to fight this in court? Why are we just accepting it? Many laws have been overturned in the courts, why not this one?

TLDR: Take out the following four words from 30.06 (d): “a Class C misdemeanor”

User avatar

SIGFan43
Member
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 6:26 am

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby SIGFan43 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:18 am

I have the same frustrations. I live in an apartment community that bans me from entering the community room/leasing office by posting 30.06/30.07 signs, so I quit going to the luncheons, bingo games, exercise classes, and other numerous events held there for the tenants. I've lived in this apartment community for eleven years, and the signs went up on March 28, 2016, about three months after Open Carry became law. The only logic I can see is that in Texas, property owners and gun owners both have rights, and businesses probably don't understand the difference between 30.06/30.07, and therein lies the issue at the bottom of all this.
SIGFan43

User avatar

TVGuy
Senior Member
Posts: 1071
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:47 am
Location: DFW

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby TVGuy » Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:24 am

CZp10 wrote: However, I can’t understand how the placing of a sign makes an otherwise completely law abiding citizen a forever recorded criminal for simply placing a foot inside a building open to all of the general public just they put up a discriminatory sign.



Except for a few places (hospitals, schools, etc.), it's only a class C misdemeanor punishable up to a $200 fine. Not exactly becoming "a forever recorded criminal".

While 30.06/07 are frustrating, I doubt it will ever change. Personal property rights are held in higher regard in Texas.

User avatar

Pariah3j
Senior Member
Posts: 769
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 5:03 pm
Location: Webster

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby Pariah3j » Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:37 am

CZp10 - welcome to the forums.

You've just expressed some of the same frustrations most of us feel as well. Now I would say you are overthinking the criminal element part of the sign a little more than needed. A Class C is nothing more than civil disobedience, it's like getting a speeding ticket. In fact, the cost of going past a 30.06 sign is cheaper in some cases.

The debate about businesses being able to post 30.06 sign has been a point of debate here several times. It comes down to personal liberty/rights vs private property rights. We must weight at what point does our rights end, and a public business begins, etc. We force public businesses to adhere to things like handicap and other regulatory requirements, so why not licensed concealed carriers? Personally, I don't think LTC should be allowed to be banned from any business that allows the general public to enter - ie storefronts.

All of that considered, I attempt to not do business with anyone posting a valid 30.06 sign. Easier said than done, I know, preaching to the choir. As you become more versed in what makes a valid 30.06 sign, you will start to notice that a lot of stores have posted invalid/unenforceable signs. At that point you might choose to ignore the sign and go in any way - concealed is concealed.

Just my .02
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny" - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar

Jusme
Senior Member
Posts: 3804
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:23 pm
Location: Johnson County, Texas

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby Jusme » Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:40 am

Welcome to the forum!! :tiphat:

I don't believe I have seen a first post so, detailed, and cohesive. JMHO
I understand your frustration with 30.06 posted businesses. But there will never be anything passed into law, that excludes private businesses, from prohibiting guns, until LTC holders are declared a "protected class" similar to any racial, ethnic, or disabled person's group. I believe private businesses, should have the right to exclude, or deny services to anyone, they choose. That being said, I do agree that unless an LTC holder actually refuses to leave, a posted business, there should be no penalty involved. Just like someone who came in with no shirt, when it is clearly posted "no shirt, no shoes, no service." There is no penalty involved, unless that person refuses to leave.
As for the Constitutionality, My rights only extend to public, areas, or property under my control. On anyone else's property, they have the final say, and for me to force my belief's upon them, is unconstitutional. Just like I can demand Jehovah Witnesses, leave my property, even though they have every right to spread their beliefs to the general public.
This topic, has been discussed, ad nauseum, throughout the forum, usually drifting off topic, in a thread. You will get opinions from both sides of the argument, but until the laws are rewritten, we will have to live with what we have now.
Take away the Second first, and the First is gone in a second :rules: :patriot:

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts: 5325
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby Liberty » Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:06 am

CZp10 wrote:Sorry, I am new here (and to concealed carry), but I have a question that has been bothering me for some time. I have read through a number of threads on this topic, but I honestly don’t understand the complacency. I apologize for bringing this up again, but I am really struggling with this. Since I am new to all this, please let me know if I am misunderstanding anything, or just being dumb in general (my wife seems to think that happens a lot for some strange reason :smile: ).

Welcome to the group, We do encourage open and free discussion on LTC law and how it affects us. Most of us do finding it upsetting when we come accros a 30.0/ 30,07 sign. But the laws regarding these signs were built in as a means of protection as much as they were intended to protect property rights. The signs must be big and precise to be enforcable. Without the protection to property owners it is unlikely we would ever have our CHL/LTC program that we enjoy today. Just legislative reality.

CZp10 wrote:Personally (and this is just my own opinion) I don’t have a problem with the requirements for a concealed carry permit, nor do I have a problem with people or businesses who do not want firearms on their private property. However, I can’t understand how the placing of a sign makes an otherwise completely law abiding citizen a forever recorded criminal for simply placing a foot inside a building open to all of the general public just they put up a discriminatory sign.

I suppose that every transgression before the court system is a "forever record criminal act". But the truth is a simple violation of entering premises with a 30.06/30.07 is a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by a $200.00 fine. A traffic violation will have more consequences than simple armed entry into a restricted 30.06 premise. The thing is we are a law abiding group and most of us take signage very seriously, we might not like the sign but we respect it.

CZp10 wrote:
The other argument is that you should just choose not to go anywhere with the sign up. This might work in some cities, but frankly I find this quite literally impossible. That would mean NEVER going to the movies, a very large number of grocery stores, any houses of worship, any and all zoos, amusement parks, or the like, toy stores, auto dealers, many restaurants, etc. Looking at texas3006 there are a huge number of locations with signs. It is in no way some small number of locations, it is a very significant inconvenience and extremely dangerous to anyone who has to unholster and lock up their firearm in a car every single time they go to any of these places.


I am not sure where you live but, I can weeks without seeing a 30.06 sign. The major grocery stores around here, have none. (Randell's, Walmart, Krogers, Arlans, and HEB. (HEB has 30.07 signs) The last restaurant I saw with a 30.06 sign was Taco Cabana. It was too small to be enforceable and came down after a public outcry and email campaign (mostly from this forum). That was several years ago. I think you might be confusing the 30.07 sign with the 30.06 sign. I view the 30.07 sign without it's mean brother the 30.06 sign as a dress code. They just don't wanna see your gun. They might have a 'shirts required' sign too because they don't wanna see our ugly hairy chests.

BTW: the signs at the zoos are probably unenforcible.


CZp10 wrote:TLDR: Take out the following four words from 30.06 (d): “a Class C misdemeanor”

[quote]
Most of us view this a good thing.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy


TreyHouston
Senior Member
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 5:00 pm
Location: Tomball

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby TreyHouston » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:26 pm

I just had to run into a shell gas station. It was posted 3006/3007. When I bought a soda, i asked the clerk and owner if they knew that their no gun signs keep off duty cops out of their store too! :shock: , let them know the Conroe police cheif was just kicked out of this dr office for the same thing.

PERHAPS I at least got them thinking about the signs for a few minutes.....
"Jump in there sport, get it done and we'll all sing your praises." -Chas

How many times a day could you say this? :cheers2:

User avatar

aero10
Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:30 am

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby aero10 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:41 pm

TreyHouston wrote:I just had to run into a shell gas station. It was posted 3006/3007. When I bought a soda, i asked the clerk and owner if they knew that their no gun signs keep off duty cops out of their store too! :shock: , let them know the Conroe police cheif was just kicked out of this dr office for the same thing.

PERHAPS I at least got them thinking about the signs for a few minutes.....

This isn't true. 30.06/7 has no bearing on off-duty police officers, even if they have a LTC.


Topic author
CZp10
Banned
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:39 am
Location: DFW

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby CZp10 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:42 pm

Thank you very much for all the great replies, this is a very helpful community :smile: . I really wish the antigun crowd knew what great people the vast majority of carry advocates are.

If there is someone here with direct knowledge of this I would appreciate them setting me straight, but I think some people may be underestimating the ramifications of being convicted of a criminal offense.

A class C misdemeanor of 30.06 would seem to be “Criminal Trespass”. The key being that once you pay the $200 you are admitting guilt and you will have a permanent record of being convicted of a crime. It is not anything like a traffic ticket. Texas officers have the right to arrest you for class C misdemeanors as well.

From a Texas attorney’s websites it shows that Class C convictions can be seen by private employers in background checks and that can be used to deny you employment. You have the right to fight it in court but you will not be provided with an attorney, you must hire your own whether you can afford it or not. Depending on the case it will easily cost 5000 to 10000 dollars.

Texas DPS says that if you get more than one of these 30.06 class C violations the courts will most likely raise it to a higher more serious conviction, and that can be used to revoke your concealed carry permit, and a higher misdemeanor can result in jail time.

I realize that these might seem unlikely consequences to some, but I still believe it is far more serious that most are assuming.

User avatar

aero10
Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:30 am

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby aero10 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:46 pm

Jusme wrote:Welcome to the forum!! :tiphat:

I don't believe I have seen a first post so, detailed, and cohesive. JMHO
I understand your frustration with 30.06 posted businesses. But there will never be anything passed into law, that excludes private businesses, from prohibiting guns, until LTC holders are declared a "protected class" similar to any racial, ethnic, or disabled person's group.

I've heard this argument many times, but I don't understand what in the political climate in Texas won't allow excluding businesses from prohibiting guns. There are states where there are no enforceable signs restricting concealed carry, only verbal warning can restrict concealed carry. Granted, typically in these instances any sign can/does restrict open carry, and there are still statutorily of limitations places as well.


Topic author
CZp10
Banned
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:39 am
Location: DFW

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby CZp10 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:07 pm

Liberty wrote:
I am not sure where you live but, I can weeks without seeing a 30.06 sign. The major grocery stores around here, have none. (Randell's, Walmart, Krogers, Arlans, and HEB. (HEB has 30.07 signs) The last restaurant I saw with a 30.06 sign was Taco Cabana. It was too small to be enforceable and came down after a public outcry and email campaign (mostly from this forum). That was several years ago. I think you might be confusing the 30.07 sign with the 30.06 sign. I view the 30.07 sign without it's mean brother the 30.06 sign as a dress code. They just don't wanna see your gun. They might have a 'shirts required' sign too because they don't wanna see our ugly hairy chests.

BTW: the signs at the zoos are probably unenforcible.

Zoos signs seem to enforceable per the Texas AG website, and we go to zoos quite a bit.

I searched the website for 30.06, and since we have kids we go to a lot of these places. Just to name a few that we frequent that have 30.06 signs: AMC theaters, Cinemark, Half Priced Books, Ikea, Main Event, Sprouts Market, Whole Foods, Strikz, American Girl, Cheesecake Factory, Toys R Us, Golfsmith, Pinstack, auto dealers, etc. There are more but I tend to get frustrated listing all of them.

User avatar

Flightmare
Senior Member
Posts: 1332
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:00 pm
Location: Plano, TX

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby Flightmare » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:17 pm

CZp10 wrote:
Liberty wrote:
I am not sure where you live but, I can weeks without seeing a 30.06 sign. The major grocery stores around here, have none. (Randell's, Walmart, Krogers, Arlans, and HEB. (HEB has 30.07 signs) The last restaurant I saw with a 30.06 sign was Taco Cabana. It was too small to be enforceable and came down after a public outcry and email campaign (mostly from this forum). That was several years ago. I think you might be confusing the 30.07 sign with the 30.06 sign. I view the 30.07 sign without it's mean brother the 30.06 sign as a dress code. They just don't wanna see your gun. They might have a 'shirts required' sign too because they don't wanna see our ugly hairy chests.

BTW: the signs at the zoos are probably unenforcible.

Zoos signs seem to enforceable per the Texas AG website, and we go to zoos quite a bit.

I searched the website for 30.06, and since we have kids we go to a lot of these places. Just to name a few that we frequent that have 30.06 signs: AMC theaters, Cinemark, Half Priced Books, Ikea, Main Event, Sprouts Market, Whole Foods, Strikz, American Girl, Cheesecake Factory, Toys R Us, Golfsmith, Pinstack, auto dealers, etc. There are more but I tend to get frustrated listing all of them.


Most Cinemark are 30.07 only, not 30.06. A buddy of mine works for Cinemark and he said that he believes they refused to prohibit carry completely after what happened in Aurora, CO. This is his opinion though, not from corporate.
Deplorable lunatic since 2016

User avatar

Jusme
Senior Member
Posts: 3804
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:23 pm
Location: Johnson County, Texas

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby Jusme » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:19 pm

aero10 wrote:
Jusme wrote:Welcome to the forum!! :tiphat:

I don't believe I have seen a first post so, detailed, and cohesive. JMHO
I understand your frustration with 30.06 posted businesses. But there will never be anything passed into law, that excludes private businesses, from prohibiting guns, until LTC holders are declared a "protected class" similar to any racial, ethnic, or disabled person's group.

I've heard this argument many times, but I don't understand what in the political climate in Texas won't allow excluding businesses from prohibiting guns. There are states where there are no enforceable signs restricting concealed carry, only verbal warning can restrict concealed carry. Granted, typically in these instances any sign can/does restrict open carry, and there are still statutorily of limitations places as well.



I realize that other States, have gotten legislation passed which, preempts, businesses, from prohibiting guns. Unfortunately, businesses, and business associations, wield a very powerful political stick here. Texas is home to some of the largest employers in the country, and the legislature is forced by political will, to listen to their voice. If the legislature had attempted to bypass, private businesses, we would not have ever gotten CHL passed. And they will always show up en mass, whenever there are any new gun laws being considered.
It's my belief that not only do businesses, hold a lot of power, but local city, and county governments, are also very influential, to new legislation. I believe that is the very reason HB560 never saw the light of day, was due to the fact that pressure was applied from city and county officials, threatening to remove political support, if they were prevented from continuing to prohibit guns in court houses, and any other place, they deemed necessary. Despite the "fines for signs" law, there is no teeth in the legislation, and enforcement, was turned over to the AG, office along with a bunch of hoops that have to be jumped through, to even get an opinion, submitted. Which again, has no legal ramifications for anyone, unless a court decides it.

We have seen the rubbery spines of so called "conservatives" in the legislature, when it comes to anything semi controversial. Proposing the denial of businesses, the right to prohibit guns, would cause those spines to turn to jelly. JMHO
Take away the Second first, and the First is gone in a second :rules: :patriot:


Topic author
CZp10
Banned
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:39 am
Location: DFW

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby CZp10 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:22 pm

Flightmare wrote:Most Cinemark are 30.07 only, not 30.06. A buddy of mine works for Cinemark and he said that he believes they refused to prohibit carry completely after what happened in Aurora, CO. This is his opinion though, not from corporate.

Ah, thanks, I misread that one. I wish more people felt that way.

User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts: 11592
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: another 30.06 question

Postby C-dub » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:52 pm

Welcome to the forum.

CZp10 wrote:Personally (and this is just my own opinion) I don’t have a problem with the requirements for a concealed carry permit, nor do I have a problem with people or businesses who do not want firearms on their private property.

30.06 seems unconstitutional, and I would very much like it challenged and taken as high in the court system as necessary.

Is it just me or do these two sentences seem contradictory?

There is a decent sized list of places that have placed 30.06 and or 30.07 signs, but those numbers pale when compared to the whole number of businesses out there to choose from. There might be one or two of our favorite places that have posted one or both signs, but that's really about it. Over the years I'm sure I've adjusted my shopping or dining habits for this reason just like my wardrobe went through some adjustment when I first got my CHL 15-16 years ago. Now, I don't even think about it and can't even recall any of the restaurants that we don't go to that we used to frequent.

There was a period where we didn't go to Taco Cabana because they had 30.06 signs posted and my daughter was very happy when those signs came down. That's the only place I can think of like this that affected us at this time.

I didn't count exactly, but a search of just one largish city near me shows that there are about 60-70 signs up in Carrollton. This includes 30.06, 30.07, and 51%. Some of them are valid notices and some are not. There are probably several hundred or maybe even a thousand plus businesses in this city. I didn't look in Dallas because I don't go there very much, but I'm sure there might be similar results as far as the percentage of businesses that post these signs there.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.


Return to “New to CHL?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests