TexasCHLforum.com

ElGato wrote:Where is the 30.06 posted Keith? Is it at the parking lot or the school building?

They are posted in the building in the glass next to the main entrance of the school. The lettering may be a bit small, but not by much, black lettering on maroon paper. My son says they're still there.

Keith

keb wrote:

KBCraig wrote: There is nothing in the law that forbids posting by government entities. The law just says that if a government entity does post, it has no effect on a CHL. (The statutory restrictions are still in effect: school buildings, meetings of governmental bodies, courts, etc.)

Kevin

Kevin,
Thanks for that info. For my education, could you tell where that is stated in the law? I don't doubt you, but I don't see that in 30.06, so I'm guessing it's buried in some other section of the code. I'd expect it to be in 46.15, but if it's there, I'm missing it.

My curiosity is aroused...

Thanks again,
Keith

Texas Penal Code wrote: § 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED
HANDGUN.

...

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section
that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is
owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or
other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying
the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

Texas Penal Code wrote: § 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED
HANDGUN.

...

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section
that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is
owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or
other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying
the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

[/quote]

That explains why I couldn't find it. I was referencing the "Texas Gun Owner's Guide". It doesn't have paragraph (e). It was published in 2002. I now see in the insert that (e) was added in 2003.

Great discussion. Thanks!

keb wrote:

Texas Penal Code wrote: § 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED
HANDGUN.

...

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section
that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is
owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or
other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying
the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

Do I understand this correctly, that if a governmental entity posts a 30.06 it has no bearing on a CHL holder?

I'm just now trying to bring myself up to speed on this, so is a govermental entity a city, county, or state owned building or property? Or all of the above?

JLaw

JLaw wrote:

keb wrote:

Texas Penal Code wrote: § 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED
HANDGUN.

...

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section
that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is
owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or
other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying
the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

Do I understand this correctly, that if a governmental entity posts a 30.06 it has no bearing on a CHL holder?

I'm just now trying to bring myself up to speed on this, so is a govermental entity a city, county, or state owned building or property? Or all of the above?

JLaw

There are schools, public meetings, courtrooms, jails and prisons.

I previously reported that Clear Brook HS had put up 30.06 signs. Well, I picked up my daughter at Clear Lake Intermediate, and they had signs posted too. It looks like they took the PDF from the Texas Penal Code site and printed it on standard 8.5x11 paper (making the letters about 1/4 in).

Since that's two schools in the system, the decision to post probably came from on high.

Now the debate is whether or not I should write to school board to complain...

I asked the DPS in an email to declare the validity of a sign that:
1) had letters less than 1 inch high
2) not posted on all entrances
3) posted on clear glass (non-contrasting)..

they waffled on their reply, stating it was up to the courts to decide if signage was 'sufficient'. Does anyone know of a ruling by a judge on any case involving the validity of a non-compliant 30.06 sign??

The City of Decatur has 30.06 signs posted at the terminal building of the Municial Airport. This is not a "Secure Area" nor does it have Courts.

Mr. Cotton,

I see your original sticky post is a couple years old. Are you still collecting examples of 30.06 signs on Texas governmental property? If so, here's another one, altho it is not one that shares location with an actual prohibited location as far as I could tell:

Universal City Public Library
100 Northview Dr
Universal City Texas 78148
210-659-7048

(Universal City is directly off the main gates of Randolph AFB, in north east San Antonio.)

I took my mother-in-law to it a couple days ago, and noticed the 30.06 sign outside the door. It appeared to be regulation size lettering, in English and Spanish. They took the contrasting letter requirement seriously -- some of the letters were in red, some in blue, maybe a couple other colors as well. They also had a list of library rules inside that led off with "no weapons," including "concealed weapons."

Best wishes, and thanks for your efforts with TSRA.

elb

ELB wrote:Mr. Cotton,

I see your original sticky post is a couple years old. Are you still collecting examples of 30.06 signs on Texas governmental property? If so, here's another one, altho it is not one that shares location with an actual prohibited location as far as I could tell:

Universal City Public Library
100 Northview Dr
Universal City Texas 78148
210-659-7048

(Universal City is directly off the main gates of Randolph AFB, in north east San Antonio.)

I took my mother-in-law to it a couple days ago, and noticed the 30.06 sign outside the door. It appeared to be regulation size lettering, in English and Spanish. They took the contrasting letter requirement seriously -- some of the letters were in red, some in blue, maybe a couple other colors as well. They also had a list of library rules inside that led off with "no weapons," including "concealed weapons."

Best wishes, and thanks for your efforts with TSRA.

elb

I am still collecting this information. I think it will be used in 2009.

Thanks,
Chas.

And if we ignore the intent of these signs, how high is the percentage we'll be hauled off to jail with the officer telling us to tell it to the judge?

Yeah, when it's not a perfect example of what a 30.06 sign should be, how will that help when your weapon is confiscated and you're in deep doo?

I think a lot of LEO's would laugh themselves silly when you argue the size of letters etc. not being correct therefore you can ignore the sign.

Or, am I wrong?

Abraham wrote:And if we ignore the intent of these signs, how high is the percentage we'll be hauled off to jail with the officer telling us to tell it to the judge?

Yeah, when it's not a perfect example of what a 30.06 sign should be, how will that help when your weapon is confiscated and you're in deep doo?

I think a lot of LEO's would laugh themselves silly when you argue the size of letters etc. not being correct therefore you can ignore the sign.

Or, am I wrong?

I would tell the oficer "I did not notice the sign. I probably would have noticed if the sign was of proper dimensions." LEOs know that signs of all kinds must meet certain standards. Blocked stop signs or trafic signs of the wrong shape or size aren't valid either

Abraham wrote:And if we ignore the intent of these signs, how high is the percentage we'll be hauled off to jail with the officer telling us to tell it to the judge?

Yeah, when it's not a perfect example of what a 30.06 sign should be, how will that help when your weapon is confiscated and you're in deep doo?

I think a lot of LEO's would laugh themselves silly when you argue the size of letters etc. not being correct therefore you can ignore the sign.

Or, am I wrong?

This thread is not about improperly worded signs, or signs with letters too small. It's about cities posting properly manufactured 30.06 signs, but posting them on property to which TPC §30.06 does not apply.

The chance of arrest should be very small, but much will depend upon the officer's knowledge of TPC §30.06, or his/her willingness to find out. Since TPC §30.06(e) is not a defense, but an element of the crime of trespass by a CHL, then I would advise any LEO client of mine (yes, I do have some) not to even think about arresting someone and saying "tell it to the judge." Arresting someone for something that is not unlawful is mighty risky business. Most people won't file a civil suit under §1983, but some will.

Chas.

The Galveston County Senior Citizen Center at 2201 Avenue L in the City of Galveston has a 30.06 sign in red letters on glass.

This is a community activity center operated by the county. I can't see any valid reason for the sign.

- Jim