Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

This forum is for general legislative discussions not specific to any given legislative session. It will remain open.

Moderator: carlson1


Ruark
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1789
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#16

Post by Ruark »

Yep, and as always, a criminal shooter will ignore everything and carry in anyway.
-Ruark
User avatar

Jusme
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5350
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:23 pm
Location: Johnson County, Texas

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#17

Post by Jusme »

This type of requirement will never pass. It would be tantamount to places that require persons to be 18 years of age or older to enter, and being required to provide child care for younger children.
Additionally, how much safer are you in a business, that prohibits lawful carry, if your gun is in a locked container, when a person, who doesn't care about the legality of carrying, comes in to rob and murder? I would think a business that has a big lock box area in front, would be a more desirable target. JMHO
Take away the Second first, and the First is gone in a second :rules: :patriot:

Abraham
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 8400
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:43 am

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#18

Post by Abraham »

No, no they shouldn't.

Businesses should provide money for me to spend, wait, no, no they shouldn't....

Businesses should, ah, fuhgeddaboutdit...
User avatar

Middle Age Russ
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1402
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:44 am
Location: Spring-Woodlands

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#19

Post by Middle Age Russ »

Irony... proposing new regulations for "someone else" because you aren't satisfied with the regulations imposed on you. We have come a long way from the framework of individual Liberty, and this thread simply proves the point yet again that we have come to accept the force of Government as a panacea for the ills of society rather than as a force that can be used against citizens.
Russ
Stay aware and engaged. Awareness buys time; time buys options. Survival may require moving quickly past the Observe, Orient and Decide steps to ACT.
NRA Life Member, CRSO, Basic Pistol, PPITH & PPOTH Instructor, Texas 4-H Certified Pistol & Rifle Coach, Texas LTC Instructor

Ruark
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1789
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#20

Post by Ruark »

Yeah, I think this is another non-issue. It's not going to happen.
-Ruark

Topic author
DDfst21
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:32 am

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#21

Post by DDfst21 »

The safest place for a gun is in its owner's holster.
I agree. My hope is that they would simply remove the 30.06 sign.
User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 9043
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#22

Post by mojo84 »

Why do some believe a business should have to accomodate the customer's wants but the customer shouldn't have to accommodate the business' desires? Both parties have rights and putting an undue burden on one is not right.

No need to start talking about businesses being required to accommodate certain people that benefit from certain laws such as the ADA as that is a different debatable situation.
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.

twomillenium
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1691
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:42 pm
Location: houston area

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#23

Post by twomillenium »

I am not against OC, I see the .07 signs as a dress code notice, but I consider the .06 signs as notice that they do not want my business. I do not think private business owners should be forced to provide shirts for the shirtless, shoes for the shoeless or any other item for rightfully choose to differ from business policy. The private business owner has made lawful choices and the consumer has the same ability to make their choice to either comply or not do business.
I am not of the mindset that it is someone else's responsibility to coddle to any of my quirks. The more we complain and demand unreasonable penalties the more time it will take for intelligent thinking to take hold. :tiphat:
Texas LTC Instructor, NRA pistol instructor, RSO, NRA Endowment Life , TSRA, Glock enthusiast (tho I have others)
Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit, wisdom is knowing not to add it to a fruit salad.

You will never know another me, this could be good or not so good, but it is still true.
User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 5052
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#24

Post by ScottDLS »

I see 30.06 like a dress code for underwear that is not visible. I think it's ridiculous that there's a criminal penalty for violating it (unless you're a cop, or an employee in your car). But nobody asked me so there is. Property owners should have no input over whether I wear boxers or briefs. :biggrinjester:
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"
User avatar

WildBill
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 17350
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:53 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Businesses Posting 30.06/07 Should Provide Safe Storage

#25

Post by WildBill »

ScottDLS wrote:I see 30.06 like a dress code for underwear that is not visible. I think it's ridiculous that there's a criminal penalty for violating it (unless you're a cop, or an employee in your car). But nobody asked me so there is. Property owners should have no input over whether I wear boxers or briefs. :biggrinjester:
Sort of like having your tongue in cheek rasher than sticking it out. ;-)
NRA Endowment Member
Post Reply

Return to “General Legislative Discussions”