TexasCHLforum.com

twomillenium wrote:

cedarparkdad987 wrote:

rtschl wrote:

cedarparkdad987 wrote:

twomillenium wrote:Debate this all you want, the 30.06 & 30.07 signs or written on a card in the exact language given or oral notification to that person stating that that firearms or not allowed are the only notifications I teach and am concerned with. That is what the law says and that is what I was told when I took the instructors courses. Yes, I have heard an officer or two interpret this different but I just figured they are in the group that didn't learn how to tie their shoes until they were in their teens.

Has it been tested in a court of law up through the appellate process? If not, do you desire to be the test case? If not, treat it as completely valid.

Can't speak for anyone else and admittedly I do not want to be the test case for anything. But why would we treat something as "completely valid" that is contrary to the statute? I think you have it backwards - until a court invalidates the law a gunbuster sign is not compliant and does not provide proper notice for LTC holders.

Until a court case tests it, you are making yourself potentially liable if you walk past one. That's fine, you should just be aware. Considering this is a place that is telling you up front that they don't want your money, why give it to them?

Edit: to be clear I agree that they are not valid. I would just caution against taking the risk, to give someone money who doesn't want your money.

I know that this does not speak for the intent of all gun buster signs. I know of at least 4 proprietors that post these, knowing it is not the right 30.06 signage, all claim they do not mean to restrict licensed carry. They seem to think it some how thwarts unlicensed (all ready illegal), it makes the liberal customers feel good (they don't understand there is proper signage), and the licensed folks who don't know the difference probably don't practice enough to be competent enough to carry. There are many more liberal or unknowledgeable patrons than patron who know the difference. You ask how I know this? Because the have taken my course and we have discussed it. I understand not wanting to be the test case, but the law is very specific in my opinion and I try to live life in preparedness and not fear.

But you do realize that you are risking a ticket for $200 (if the police arrive before you leave, and the arriving officer is ignorant)? Then you will have to go before a judge (if the DA is also ignorant). And you might have to appeal a conviction (if the judge is also ignorant). You could have multiple appeals in front of you if we have a huge issue with truly ignorant judges throughout our justice system. One semi-intelligent person in this chain will of course result in no further issues. And you will be able to file a civil suit for your damages. Maybe you will get lucky the other way, with a similar level of ignorance on the part of the judge / jury in your civil suit and you will win 10 bazillion dollars. Hey, as long as we are in the land of baseless hypotheticals assuming that the world is full of idiots, then the sky is the limit, right?

BTW, you are taking the same risks by driving to work, or walking to your mailbox, or even just by existing. If we base our decisions on not wanting to be charged for anything that is clearly legal, then we best just stay in bed.

cedarparkdad987 wrote:

twomillenium wrote:Debate this all you want, the 30.06 & 30.07 signs or written on a card in the exact language given or oral notification to that person stating that that firearms or not allowed are the only notifications I teach and am concerned with. That is what the law says and that is what I was told when I took the instructors courses. Yes, I have heard an officer or two interpret this different but I just figured they are in the group that didn't learn how to tie their shoes until they were in their teens.

Has it been tested in a court of law up through the appellate process? If not, do you desire to be the test case? If not, treat it as completely valid.

As far as I know, your ability to breath air has not been "tested in a court of law up through the appellate process". So unless you want to be the "test case" you breath at your own peril.

The same applies to a whole host of daily activities that are perfectly legal.

rotor wrote:

Abraham wrote:O.K., then why the need for 30.06 /07 signs with specificity in both English and Spanish in 1" size letters?

Or, is that just boiler plate that can be ignored if the business decides to notify with wee size hand outs at their discretion?

Or can they tell you're a CCer and hey man, you can't come in here with a gun?

C'mon, either there's a commonly understood law (proper signage) or every business can conduct their own approach?

Which is it?

30.06/07 legislation specifically says the business can give you a card (properly worded) that bars carrying without putting a sign at the entrance. I guess it can be used as an alternative to signs at the entrance and may even have the potential for discrimination. Let's say they only give the 30.07 to old white men but not young hispanics carrying openly. Complain to the legislators if you don't like it but it is written into the law. Not the old white man part but the methods of notifying are very clearly written into 06/07.

I have yet to encounter a business that has taken the "card" approach. This might be due to the fact that such an approach opens up a lot of gray area, and would be nigh impossible to implement with 100% certainty. Do you station someone at all doors to ensure that every person gets a card? What do you do about the people who will decline and just keep walking? Do you have your "card person" chase them into the store, thereby leaving their post and not insuring that other visitors get cards? Or maybe they lock the doors while they are doing the chasing?

To me, this seems like a very difficult way to mandate that your customers conform to your beliefs about their personal behavior that impacts no one else. It would be simpler and better, IMHO to post the correct signage. And it would be even better to just stop worrying about the actions of complete strangers that have no impact whatsoever on you or anyone else.

Pawpaw wrote:I believe the receipt is your ticket at those theaters.

Ah, so the person receiving the tickets / receipts would receive notice. That's usually my teenage daughter when we go out to the movies.

Pawpaw wrote:

Abraham wrote:rtschl,

That's interesting, but I'm puzzled about the mechanics of someone printing (presumably) hand size cards with all the 30.06 wording and how they go about distributing them?

If I enter your business as a concealed carrier, am I supposed to grab a card, like folks who pick a number as the next customer in line when his number is called for service, or are they in a case outside the business and I'm encouraged to pick one up and read it before I go any further into the store....what the heck?

This approach sounds like nuttiness on a grand order or am I simply over looking everyone else but me knows the answer to...?

There was a thread some time ago about a movie theater that had 30.06 printed on the back of the receipt.

Also, if you went somewhere (doctor's office?) that had a sign-in sheet with 30.06 printed on it, you've received notice... and signed to say so.

Just playing Devil's advocate, but a 30.06 wording printed on the receipt would probably be valid notice for the person getting the receipt, assuming they actually took it and didn't just grab the tickets and leave the receipt. Everyone else in that party would not have received notice of any type, of course. Similar for notice printed on tickets. Whoever holds the tickets (usually only one person for my family, and usually not me) gets the notice, not so much for anyone else.

Notice on a sign-in sheet? That would be more interesting.

rotor wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:Tex has a great summary above. To me a "no firearms" sign on a business means something similar to a "no gas" sign at a gas station, or a "no vacancy" sign at a hotel / motel. It is simple English. The place in question does not have the thing that comes after the word "no". If I drive onto a gas station that has a sign saying "no gas", am I going to be arrested because there is some gas in the tank of my car? Or does that sign simply mean the same thing as a "no firearms" sign? That the gas station does not have any gas for sale at the moment?

Hopefully you never have to use that interpretation in court. Certainly very creative though.

I doubt I will ever have to. If anything, I will just need to refute the interpretation that the prosecutor tries to assign to the words "no ___". I do agree that it would be extremely creative to interpret "no gas", or "no firearms", or "no ties" to mean "no person who is in possession of ___ may enter these premises". It would be amusing to see a prosecutor attempt that type of legal gymnastics in court.

Tex has a great summary above. To me a "no firearms" sign on a business means something similar to a "no gas" sign at a gas station, or a "no vacancy" sign at a hotel / motel. It is simple English. The place in question does not have the thing that comes after the word "no". If I drive onto a gas station that has a sign saying "no gas", am I going to be arrested because there is some gas in the tank of my car? Or does that sign simply mean the same thing as a "no firearms" sign? That the gas station does not have any gas for sale at the moment?