Enforceable and/or Non-Compliant Signage

[thetexan]

It would behoove anyone dealing with gun law to not become so wise in your own eyes that you become unteachable.

You could also save yourself some time by not arguing with someone who agrees with you and has stated exactly what you are stating now many many posts ago.

Rex

[Soccerdad1995]

If you are not going to walk past a non-compliant sign for fear that you may be on the hook for a $200 citation, then let me ask you the following.

Are you going to consistently go 5 mph under the speed limit for fear of receiving a speeding ticket from an officer with a faulty radar gun?

Are you going to refrain from crossing a street if you can't be certain that you can make it across before the flashing "warning" starts?

Are you going to keep meticulous track of every time someone gives you $5 in gas money for doing them a favor so that you can report it on your income taxes?

It is one thing to follow the letter of every single law regardless of the minimal potential penalty. It is quite another thing to avoid doing things that are entirely legal because you are fearful of wrongful prosecution, especially when we are talking about a maximum punishment of a couple hundred dollar fine. Our freedoms are limited enough as-is. We don't need to voluntarily limit them even more.

Personally, I wish that police chiefs / sheriffs would state that they are not going to send officers out for a report that someone might be violating a class C misdemeanor in the first place. The business owner should ask someone to leave if they are uncomfortable for any reason. If that person flat out refuses to leave or becomes belligerent, then fine, send officers to investigate and resolve the situation.

[thetexan]

If you are not going to walk past a non-compliant sign for fear that you may be on the hook for a $200 citation, then let me ask you the following.

Are you going to consistently go 5 mph under the speed limit for fear of receiving a speeding ticket from an officer with a faulty radar gun?

Are you going to refrain from crossing a street if you can't be certain that you can make it across before the flashing "warning" starts?

Are you going to keep meticulous track of every time someone gives you $5 in gas money for doing them a favor so that you can report it on your income taxes?

It is one thing to follow the letter of every single law regardless of the minimal potential penalty. It is quite another thing to avoid doing things that are entirely legal because you are fearful of wrongful prosecution, especially when we are talking about a maximum punishment of a couple hundred dollar fine. Our freedoms are limited enough as-is. We don't need to voluntarily limit them even more.

Personally, I wish that police chiefs / sheriffs would state that they are not going to send officers out for a report that someone might be violating a class C misdemeanor in the first place. The business owner should ask someone to leave if they are uncomfortable for any reason. If that person flat out refuses to leave or becomes belligerent, then fine, send officers to investigate and resolve the situation.

Incomprehensibly, you are missing my point. I have not suggested what you should do or not do. I might walk past a slightly non compliant sign myself. But I don't do so unknowledgeable of how the court system might handle my case.

If the prosecutor believes he can prevail against you because the sign was "close enough" (the non-compliance was non-substantial or deminimus) then he might proceed and you may very well be convicted of the Class C, assuming you went to court over it.

There is no case law (for 30.06 that is) but I suspect there is plenty in other areas such as banking law, etc. where courts have convicted when certain specific notification requirements were not technically precise but was good enough. And I'm sure visa versa.

Would you be as willing to prove your principles if instead of the infraction being reduced to a Class C it had been increased to a third degree felony?

I suspect not.

tex

[ScottDLS]

Does the "de minimus" concept apply to speeding 1 mile over as a defense? Also, consider AnyGun's point about the specific language of 30.06 requiring the notice to be IDENTICAL. I am familiar with the legal concept and it tends to be used in contract and tax law more than in criminal law, especially when deciding in favor of the prosecution. Consider the BAC definition of intoxicated in Chapter 49. Is .079 good enough to automatically establish? And YES I know that you can be intoxicated below that amount, but NOT as established by the chemical test.

Finally, I think we agree on my main point which is that with the penalty reduced to a class C, I am willing to risk what I feel would a wrongful conviction by walking past a "minimally" non-compliant sign (whatever that is), because I wouldn't be breaking the law. And I would invest some of my (and the State's) time attempting to establish my innocence in JP court.

[treadlightly]

With no criticism of different viewpoints, if a sign has the appearance of wanting to enforce 30.06 or 30.07, I'm going to stay out.

This would be good enough for me: "Per 30.06, if you don't look like a sitting duck, waddle like a sitting duck, and have a target on your back like a sitting duck, you aren't welcome here, whether or not you have a license."

It would be very wrong to post that sort of sign, obviously.

If a sign just says no guns, or has the circle-and-slash handgun and doesn't reference the law, I think I'll probably assume that means unlicensed carry, not me.

My family runs a small business, mostly managed by my youngest son. There are no signs up. If there were, they wouldn't ban anything.

I prefer lawfully armed customers. Our services include access to a remote location without security. Really, if you're going to do business with me, please bring your handgun. I'll sleep better.

Besides, it's your right to do so.

[Soccerdad1995]

With no criticism of different viewpoints, if a sign has the appearance of wanting to enforce 30.06 or 30.07, I'm going to stay out.

This would be good enough for me: "Per 30.06, if you don't look like a sitting duck, waddle like a sitting duck, and have a target on your back like a sitting duck, you aren't welcome here, whether or not you have a license."

It would be very wrong to post that sort of sign, obviously.

If a sign just says no guns, or has the circle-and-slash handgun and doesn't reference the law, I think I'll probably assume that means unlicensed carry, not me.

My family runs a small business, mostly managed by my youngest son. There are no signs up. If there were, they wouldn't ban anything.

I prefer lawfully armed customers. Our services include access to a remote location without security. Really, if you're going to do business with me, please bring your handgun. I'll sleep better.

Besides, it's your right to do so.

I am thinking about posting my house with a sign that says you are not welcome unless you have the means to defend yourself from harm. If you have not mastered a martial art and/or are in the top 5% of all physically fit individuals, please ensure that you are properly armed.*

Do you think that liberals will honor my sign and not come to my parties, even though my sign is not legally enforceable? Will the local police show up if tell them that I suspect someone is violating my sign?

* My SO has threatened to veto this sign, so I am working on a compromise.

[treadlightly]

Does the "de minimus" concept apply to speeding 1 mile over as a defense?

Ooh, ooh - I got this one! Speeding is a pretty strange crime.

I once admitted guilt for speeding, paid the fine, and then found some suspicions confirmed. The court could not tell me any particular law I was in violation of.

In the aftermath of my sentencing (about a hundred bucks for 51 in a 40, about 800 feet before the 50 MPH sign), I learned some really keen stuff about speeding.

There is no law in Texas against violating any so-called speed limit on State highways, and probably on many city streets, too.

Set your cruise control on 140 and slam your way down any State highway you care to name, and you have not broken a speed limit. Those signs that say things like "Speed Limit 70" don't set a speed limit.

You can be cited for any speed, either above or below the posted "limit".

Your responsibility is to limit yourself to a reasonable and proper speed, or some such wording. In a fog, in a 70 MPH zone, 25 might be exceeding reasonable and proper speed, the same crime as running 140 on a clear sunny day. If after your arrest for flagrantly unsafe speed, if you can convince a judge that 140 is reasonable and proper, you're good!

The speed limit signs are recognized by the law as prima facie evidence of the fastest speed anyone not suffering affluenza would consider proper in good conditions.

In other words, observe the speed limit and you have an airtight defense against a speeding charge, excepting deteriorated conditions. Exceed the posted limit and you may have an argument. Gassing it around a truck and hitting 85 in your passing maneuver is not illegal, but could be a conversation starter.

As to my case, the city attorney flew off the handle over a polite letter I wrote, questioning the court. I forwarded his letter to the city manager and the city attorney lost his job. I can't document the connection, but I'd like to think I was the straw that broke that camel's back.

[Soccerdad1995]

If you are not going to walk past a non-compliant sign for fear that you may be on the hook for a $200 citation, then let me ask you the following.

Are you going to consistently go 5 mph under the speed limit for fear of receiving a speeding ticket from an officer with a faulty radar gun?

Are you going to refrain from crossing a street if you can't be certain that you can make it across before the flashing "warning" starts?

Are you going to keep meticulous track of every time someone gives you $5 in gas money for doing them a favor so that you can report it on your income taxes?

It is one thing to follow the letter of every single law regardless of the minimal potential penalty. It is quite another thing to avoid doing things that are entirely legal because you are fearful of wrongful prosecution, especially when we are talking about a maximum punishment of a couple hundred dollar fine. Our freedoms are limited enough as-is. We don't need to voluntarily limit them even more.

Personally, I wish that police chiefs / sheriffs would state that they are not going to send officers out for a report that someone might be violating a class C misdemeanor in the first place. The business owner should ask someone to leave if they are uncomfortable for any reason. If that person flat out refuses to leave or becomes belligerent, then fine, send officers to investigate and resolve the situation.

Incomprehensibly, you are missing my point. I have not suggested what you should do or not do. I might walk past a slightly non compliant sign myself. But I don't do so unknowledgeable of how the court system might handle my case.

If the prosecutor believes he can prevail against you because the sign was "close enough" (the non-compliance was non-substantial or deminimus) then he might proceed and you may very well be convicted of the Class C, assuming you went to court over it.

There is no case law (for 30.06 that is) but I suspect there is plenty in other areas such as banking law, etc. where courts have convicted when certain specific notification requirements were not technically precise but was good enough. And I'm sure visa versa.

Would you be as willing to prove your principles if instead of the infraction being reduced to a Class C it had been increased to a third degree felony?

I suspect not.

tex

A couple points:

1. It is not at all incomprehensible that I might be missing your point. I miss the point all the time. Just ask my wife.

2. I wasn't responding to your post. That's why I didn't quote you. I specifically addressed my post to anyone who would avoid walking past a non-compliant sign. If that's not you, then my post is not directed at you.

3. With regards to your last question, yes of course I would be more concerned about wrongful prosecution of a third degree felony that I would be of a Class C misdemeanor. If they ever raise speeding to a third degree felony, then I might decide to start taking Uber everywhere instead of driving. This might be a valid point if we ever start talking about actual felonies. Until then it is irrelevant.

[ScottDLS]

With no criticism of different viewpoints, if a sign has the appearance of wanting to enforce 30.06 or 30.07, I'm going to stay out.

This would be good enough for me: "Per 30.06, if you don't look like a sitting duck, waddle like a sitting duck, and have a target on your back like a sitting duck, you aren't welcome here, whether or not you have a license."

It would be very wrong to post that sort of sign, obviously.

If a sign just says no guns, or has the circle-and-slash handgun and doesn't reference the law, I think I'll probably assume that means unlicensed carry, not me.

My family runs a small business, mostly managed by my youngest son. There are no signs up. If there were, they wouldn't ban anything.

I prefer lawfully armed customers. Our services include access to a remote location without security. Really, if you're going to do business with me, please bring your handgun. I'll sleep better.

Besides, it's your right to do so.

I am thinking about posting my house with a sign that says you are not welcome unless you have the means to defend yourself from harm. If you have not mastered a martial art and/or are in the top 5% of all physically fit individuals, please ensure that you are properly armed.*

Do you think that liberals will honor my sign and not come to my parties, even though my sign is not legally enforceable? Will the local police show up if tell them that I suspect someone is violating my sign?

* My SO has threatened to veto this sign, so I am working on a compromise.

I believe that under the interpretation of 30.05 that has been offered on this forum and supported in the (distant) past by the AG Dan Morales, your sign would be enforceable and violation would be a Class B misdemeanor. Fair warning to your weakling leftist guests...