srothstein wrote:IANAL but I will surely advise my friends to not try the semantic games mentioned. It would be like someone seeing the "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" sign and trying to claim it does not mean you will not be served if you are barefoot or bare chested. To me, this is the same as trying to claim that the old red circle with a slash through it did not apply to me because it had a picture of a Beretta 9mm and I carry a 1911.
As evidence, I will point out that in at least 45 states (I think) putting up the same sign has the legal force behind it to get people arrested on a regular basis. There is also a lot of cases where people have been arrested in Texas for wearing the wrong clothing when there was a sign saying "No Biker Attire" or "No Gang Signs". When you read 30.05, there is no definition of what constitutes proper legal notice.
45 states? Most state trespass laws can't be invoked in public locations without specific warning to the individual involved. States that have specific sign requirements generally address them in the "weapons" part of their penal code and don't conflate them with trespass.
I don't believe it's clear at all in Texas that a sign saying "no firearms" means that (IAW PC 30.05) entry is prohibited to those carrying long guns, concealed or otherwise. PC 30.05 invokes a criminal sanction and as such the requirements for notice should be explicitly conformed with. Other than the 22 year old Dan Morales AG opinion on 30.05, which was mooted by statute 20 years ago, there seems to be no clear evidence that "any" sign invokes trespass under 30.05, particularly for otherwise public locations.
PC §30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS.
(a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:
(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden;
...
(b) For purposes of this section:
(1) “Entry” means the intrusion of the entire body.
(2) “Notice” means:
...
(C) a sign or signs posted on the property or at the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;
How does "no shirt, no shoes, no service" indicate that entry is forbidden to shirtless individuals? No guns? That doesn't seem any more explicit. IAW TX PC 30.05 Entry with a firearm is prohibited....Maybe, for non LTC. A pictogram of a Beretta with a slash through it...very big stretch to say that prohibits entry by persons carrying long guns.
Even the signs that some stores selling alcohol are posting: It is illegal carry a weapon on these premises, unless that weapon is a handgun and you are licensed under GC 411.... or something to that effect. I don't know if TABC is handing these out, but they are at best misleading, and at worst, wrong. Some people have said that such a sign prohibits a person from entering a store so posted with a long gun... Under 30.05? How does that sign specify that "entry is prohibited"? I guess you could argue that the by saying it's illegal that you are prohibiting entry, but it really should be more explicit that entry (with a long gun, or a handgun by an unlicensed person is prohibited). Because if you get right down to it, there is no law that says I can't carry a long gun in a 51% location. Now the TABC licensee
could be sanctioned if they knowing allowed me to, but for a concealed long gun...
Anyway, to offer my opinion on the OP's question. Does the "no firearms" sign that he saw have any criminal legal implications...? For a LTC carrying a handgun, NO. For someone carrying a long gun, probably not, though it's highly likely that if you are discovered you will be told to leave and failure to do so would definitely be an offense.
See I was even able to work that into this thread!
