Legal to carry when not all doors have signs?

[ScottDLS]

Probably open a can of worms here but:
I have read many similar posts as this and always wonder why after seeing a sign legal or not which says basically we don't want guns here why push the issue ? You have been notified. Being in LE both state and federal and now civilian I have seen what can happen, it is just not worth it, believe me you do not want to have to go through the system, win the battle loose the war. It can have a detrimental effect on the rest of your life, it is not worth it. Remember all the years we could not carry. A class A is not a good thing to have hanging on you.
My friend said back to me it was not a legal sign so I will carry, I asked do you really understand that if caught and charged the real problems you may face? Well I would be legal he said, and how much less $$$ in your account time spent, stress etc will you go through? I have seen 2 people caught carrying where posted, their actions being very polite and non confronting anyone are what saved them plus the business owner really not wanting to cause anyone a problem, they were lucky, if they had pushed the issue well it could have been very different. Both were concealed well almost and noticed. The store owner told them he did not want firearms in his business due to increased insurance costs he thought he would have, truth or not it don't matter and told the officers responding he would not sign a complaint and invited the 2 men back to his business anytime they wished to do so without a firearms if they chose to do so. The respectful attitude went along way.

In most cases it's not a class A any more it's a class C $200 fine/no jail, and that is only if you are properly notified (i.e. correct sign or oral). I haven't heard of a recent rash of arrests for class C's recently, though it is conceivable. If people were caught for carrying past a legal 30.06, they don't seem to have been doing a very good job concealing, and if they intentionally did so, then they deserved to get the class A or C.
I have "a friend" who has intentionally carried past clearly incorrect signage when it was a class A. Since it was concealed, the issue just isn't likely to come up.

[C-dub]

Does this pretty much summarize my situation?:

Because the sign is not posted were the public can see it, the public probably has not been notified and can carry inside the building.

Employees that have desk jobs near the lobby probably have not been notified and can carry inside the building.

Employees who work in the factory/warehouse area who walk in and out of the shipping/receiving door on a daily basis probably have been notified and cannot carry inside the building.

My point was that since it's not properly posted where the public can see it that it may be completely invalid to anyone. A judge could interpret it to mean that the public would not be notified, while employees were, but what would the point be of doing it that way? Just make it company policy with a properly worded paragraph in the handbook or whatever and don't bother buying and putting a sign at all. I have a feeling that your company doesn't think or want it to only apply to employees, but what do I know?

[twomillenium]

IANAL but the way I understand it. As an employee, a employer may prohibit a employee from licensed carry on the premises. Even though the public is allowed to license carry on the premises. The employer can notify the employee by various means including a written policy in the HR handbook. The employer may also give effective consent for an employee to carry past a .07 or .06 sign. It would be a good idea to get effective consent in writing.

See GC §411.203. RIGHTS OF EMPLOYERS pgs.30-31 and PC §30.06 and PC §30.07, a) (1) & (2) pgs 46-47

[ScottDLS]

IANAL but the way I understand it. As an employee, a employer may prohibit a employee from licensed carry on the premises. Even though the public is allowed to license carry on the premises. The employer can notify the employee by various means including a written policy in the HR handbook. The employer may also give effective consent for an employee to carry past a .07 or .06 sign. It would be a good idea to get effective consent in writing.

See GC §411.203. RIGHTS OF EMPLOYERS pgs.30-31 and PC §30.06 and PC §30.07, a) (1) & (2) pgs 46-47

Correct, but in order to prosecute a 30.06 trespass charge against an employee the notice must be specified in the 30.06 format or the employee must be orally notified.

411.203 lets the employer prohibit employees from carrying by policy, so employee could get fired (unless was in the car in the parking lot), but to sustain the 30.06 charge the notification would have to have the 30.06 language or be oral. On the other hand getting fired for cause is going to cost you more than $200, so do it at your own risk.

[twomillenium]

If the employee is notified by Employee handbook, charges can still be sought even if a posted business is not posted at employee entrance because the employee has been notified by the handbook, especially if employee/s sign a document saying they have read and understand handbook.

Edited because of incomplete thought (I guess the wife is right)

[ScottDLS]

If the employee is notified by Employee handbook, charges can still be sought even if business is not posted because the employee has been notified by the handbook, especially if employee/s sign a document saying they have read and understand handbook.

No no, I'm saying charges cannot be sought because the notice didn't take the form specified in the 30.06 statute. They could get fired, but they couldn't be prosecuted because the Employee handbook without specific language, doesn't "notify" them property. However, they can be fired.

[thetexan]

If the employee is notified by Employee handbook, charges can still be sought even if business is not posted because the employee has been notified by the handbook, especially if employee/s sign a document saying they have read and understand handbook.

Incorrecto Kemo Sabe

[tbryanh]

. . . . I have a feeling that your company doesn't think or want it to only apply to employees, but what do I know?

I think you might be right. The truck drivers have to come inside through the shipping and receiving door to get their paperwork signed off. Maybe they don't want the truck drivers carrying their weapons inside the building.

[tbryanh]

IANAL but the way I understand it. As an employee, a employer may prohibit a employee from licensed carry on the premises. Even though the public is allowed to license carry on the premises. The employer can notify the employee by various means including a written policy in the HR handbook. The employer may also give effective consent for an employee to carry past a .07 or .06 sign. It would be a good idea to get effective consent in writing.

See GC §411.203. RIGHTS OF EMPLOYERS pgs.30-31 and PC §30.06 and PC §30.07, a) (1) & (2) pgs 46-47

I've only been there 3 months. I would have to know them real well before I would ask for written permission to carry. I doubt that I will ever become good buddies with the manager or president, so what your saying sounds good, but I don't think it will ever happen.

[Soccerdad1995]

Probably open a can of worms here but:
I have read many similar posts as this and always wonder why after seeing a sign legal or not which says basically we don't want guns here why push the issue ? You have been notified. Being in LE both state and federal and now civilian I have seen what can happen, it is just not worth it, believe me you do not want to have to go through the system, win the battle loose the war. It can have a detrimental effect on the rest of your life, it is not worth it. Remember all the years we could not carry. A class A is not a good thing to have hanging on you.
My friend said back to me it was not a legal sign so I will carry, I asked do you really understand that if caught and charged the real problems you may face? Well I would be legal he said, and how much less $$$ in your account time spent, stress etc will you go through? I have seen 2 people caught carrying where posted, their actions being very polite and non confronting anyone are what saved them plus the business owner really not wanting to cause anyone a problem, they were lucky, if they had pushed the issue well it could have been very different. Both were concealed well almost and noticed. The store owner told them he did not want firearms in his business due to increased insurance costs he thought he would have, truth or not it don't matter and told the officers responding he would not sign a complaint and invited the 2 men back to his business anytime they wished to do so without a firearms if they chose to do so. The respectful attitude went along way.

I'm not sure whether you are talking about carrying past a compliant or non-compliant sign. If the former, then I agree that people should not carry past a compliant sign. If they do, then they should face the appropriate consequences.

But I cannot advise people to give up their legal rights and avoid carrying in a place that does not have a compliant sign just because a police officer may arrest them out of ignorance*. You might as well advise people to avoid leaving their house because they could be incorrectly arrested for anything, after all.

Even a LEO who is completely wrong on the law would probably still not arrest someone for a Class C misdemeanor, so we really are talking about a series of extreme mistakes that would need to happen before a law abiding citizen suffered much harm.

[twomillenium]

If the employee is notified by Employee handbook, charges can still be sought even if a posted business is not posted at employee entrance because the employee has been notified by the handbook, especially if employee/s sign a document saying they have read and understand handbook.

Incorrecto Kemo Sabe

Excuse me.
Should have said "even if a posted business is not posted at employee entrance" edit made in bold
Thanks for the catch