Abraham wrote:My poor aching about to explode head...
Oh, here's your officially earned Monty Python Arguing License.
You've earned it!
I'm sure it is and a lot of people eyes are bleeding. This is precisely why each of us needs to become experts in the rules AS WRITEN first.
When some one uses imperative words and phrases like "you HAVE TO" or "YOU MUST" or YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO" they are stating that there is a rule that supports the use of the imperative. People tend to throw those imperatives around which are then passed down from one listener to the next. After a few iterations of this everyone becomes confused and loses sight of what the foundational law states. The classic '30.06 must be posted at an entrance' interpretation is an example of this.
The only vaccination against this feeling of being dependent on other people to explain the meaning of statutes is to take the time to learn the actual law as it is written. Otherwise you will be a slave to the last person who gave you an explanation. You become a ping pong ball being slapped back and forth between one explanation and another. No wonder people become confused!
The statute on the size, wording, location of posting and the like are so simply worded the average middle schooler can understand it. But when people add "owner's intent" ( as if one can determine the owner's intent), "what makes sense", "...how are we supposed to know unless...", " a DPS instructor said...", "conspicuously means..." and a thousand other modifications, they add elements that ARE NOT A PART of the law. These added assumptions, interpretations and modifications do nothing but cause the confusion we experience in these discussions.
Here is the simple two step way to break through this fog...
1. Know and be and expert on the actual language and wording of the statute and what those words actually say based on their common definition and usage.
2. If someone tells you something different, or gives you their interpretation, or throws in one of those insidious and hidden assumptions, or uses imperative words like "have to", " supposed to", "can't", "must" then ask them to give their authority and source of their statement. If they can't or try to argue their points with more assumptions and interpretations then simply disregard that info and go back to the book. Go back to the book!!!
There must be hundreds of people on this forum. And none of them, including me, out argues the BOOK!
So while any assumption about the owner's intent may be interesting to ponder it has no legal power to modify the statute. That is the job of the courts. If you wish to assume anything on the conservative safe side then wonderful, be my guest. But passing that on to the next guy as fact is incorrect. Any interpretation someone has is just that, an interpretation, and again should not be passed on in a educational sense. And after a short time of playing this adult version of the kid's 'Telephone' game we end up with one misinformed person leading another misinformed person.
Always go back to the statute. Always read the words and go back to the statute because that is what you will be judged on. When someone says the rule can not be understood without being interpreted that is patently false. My rather extensive experience has shown me that 95-97% of most rules, regulations, and laws are clear as written and do not require our interpretation to properly follow. Notice that I am not saying that one can not make certain interpretations or assumptions in practical everyday use, but they should always be on the safe side, AND NEVER PASSED ON AS FACT. If you want to help someone always point them to the statute first, then if they still need help then help.
Remember, most people argue that there is a need for interpretation because "how else can we make sense of it all". This is many times a defense mechanism or another way of saying that the statute does not justify what THEY want the rule to say or doesn't validate what THEY want to do, or doesn't support THEIR actions. This is not limited to statutes on LTC. This applies to almost every other discipline in life that is regulated by statutes or regs. There are a few statutes in many disciplines (I believe very few of these LTC rules fall into this category) and rules that are genuinely difficult to understand and require careful study and guidance from others. But if anyone uses their interpretation to de-confuse you require them to explain their authority for the interpretation and reconcile their explanation to the wording of the rule. If they can't, then take their attempt to explain the rule with a thank you and a grain of salt. THEN GO BACK TO THE BOOK.
The book IS NEVER WRONG nor, by definition, CAN be! It says what it says and is what it is. None of us can claim that.
tex
I've said this before I don't care what kind of sign they have. It could be written on a napkin. If I see it and know they don't want my gun I don't carry. I believe the sign requirements are there to make sure you see them.