TexasCHLforum.com

Keith B wrote:

C-dub wrote:They are not very different nor am I arguing that they are. I am saying that to try and use either as a defense is extremely weak and I would use neither. I am also not one of the folks using the argument that because the sign(s) in the OP don't look like what we normally see that they are not valid. If you'll notice, I'm one of the first back on page one that is arguing that these do meet the elements of a valid sign and have continued to do so.

I think I am going to amend the phrase to 'Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades and 30.06 signs'.

Good one!

I agree with Dave - I don't like your chances in front of a judge or jury. Until there is caselaw, I consider it a risk.

The 30.06 sign must be in "contrasting colors".

The 30.06 required language in the English and Spanish are in the SAME color, not
contrasting.

The rest of the sign "contains" contrasting colors but the rest of the sign has nothing
to do with 30.06.

rivertripper wrote:The 30.06 required language in the English and Spanish are in the SAME color, not
contrasting.

Welcome to the forum rivertripper.

Are you saying that the English and Spanish text must be in contrasting color to each other? I'm curious because the text I see in the OP's sign for the 30.06 text is red on a white background. I think the contrasting color thing refers to the text compared to the background, not each language.

If you see a "real" 30.06 sign it is the lettering that is contrasting
as between English and Spanish, generally the English in one color
and the Spanish in the other

The statute calls for a "sign posted on the property that...
includes the language described in paragraph a...
in both English and Spanish...
and appears in contrasting colors...
block letters...
at least one inch in height...
is displayed in a conspicuous manner...
clearly visible to the public

rivertripper wrote:If you see a "real" 30.06 sign it is the lettering that is contrasting
as between English and Spanish, generally the English in one color
and the Spanish in the other

The statute calls for a "sign posted on the property that...
includes the language described in paragraph a...
in both English and Spanish...
and appears in contrasting colors...
block letters...
at least one inch in height...
is displayed in a conspicuous manner...
clearly visible to the public

Sorry, no. The requirement lines are separate (i) and (ii), so it does not require English in one color and Spanish in another.

(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by
Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with
block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner
clearly visible to the public.

Below is a valid 30.06 sign

rivertripper wrote:If you see a "real" 30.06 sign it is the lettering that is contrasting
as between English and Spanish, generally the English in one color
and the Spanish in the other

The statute calls for a "sign posted on the property that...
includes the language described in paragraph a...
in both English and Spanish...
and appears in contrasting colors...
block letters...
at least one inch in height...
is displayed in a conspicuous manner...
clearly visible to the public

I have seen them that way, but as Keith has pointed out, that is not the requirement. Contrasting refers to the difference between the text and the background.

Thanks Keith, but wouldn't that make every printed matter "contrasting colors"?

Regretably, the DPS does not promulgate the signs; also, there probably is no
Texas case law on this.

At a minimum, I do understand the principle of - you can beat the rap but not the ride.

rivertripper wrote:Thanks Keith, but wouldn't that make every printed matter "contrasting colors"?

Regretably, the DPS does not promulgate the signs; also, there probably is no
Texas case law on this.

At a minimum, I do understand the principle of - you can beat the rap but not the ride.

And therein lies a problem. You have probably seen white text on a clear glass window. Of course, it is a different color, but is it really contrasting? I refer you to your own post. There is no case law on this matter. We are just too darn law abiding and I don't have the time or money or inclination to risk challenging that part.

rivertripper wrote:Thanks Keith, but wouldn't that make every printed matter "contrasting colors"?

Regretably, the DPS does not promulgate the signs; also, there probably is no
Texas case law on this.

At a minimum, I do understand the principle of - you can beat the rap but not the ride.

Well, not really for all printing. Contrasting colors are actually 'complementary colors' http://desktoppub.about.com/od/glossary ... colors.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementary_colors" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Take a sign with an orange background and yellow letters. While it may be readable, it would not be contrasting. Green and yellow are also not contrasting. However, black and white are, as well as blue and red.

Keith B wrote:

rivertripper wrote:Thanks Keith, but wouldn't that make every printed matter "contrasting colors"?

Regretably, the DPS does not promulgate the signs; also, there probably is no
Texas case law on this.

At a minimum, I do understand the principle of - you can beat the rap but not the ride.

Well, not really for all printing. Contrasting colors are actually 'complementary colors' http://desktoppub.about.com/od/glossary ... colors.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementary_colors" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Take a sign with an orange background and yellow letters. While it may be readable, it would not be contrasting. Green and yellow are also not contrasting. However, black and white are, as well as blue and red.

And then you get into colors that color blind people cannot distinguish. My brother in law cannot tell the difference between red and green, which would usually be considered contrasting colors.

jimlongley wrote: My brother in law cannot tell the difference between red and green, which would usually be considered contrasting colors.

No no no, you have that confused. Red and green are not contrasting colors, they are Christmas colors!!

Keith B wrote:

rivertripper wrote:If you see a "real" 30.06 sign it is the lettering that is contrasting
as between English and Spanish, generally the English in one color
and the Spanish in the other

The statute calls for a "sign posted on the property that...
includes the language described in paragraph a...
in both English and Spanish...
and appears in contrasting colors...
block letters...
at least one inch in height...
is displayed in a conspicuous manner...
clearly visible to the public

Sorry, no. The requirement lines are separate (i) and (ii), so it does not require English in one color and Spanish in another.

(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by
Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with
block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner
clearly visible to the public.

Below is a valid 30.06 sign

[ Image ]

If you want to get picky, this sign is not compliant. It is missing a comma as compared to the penal code, section 30.06.

jimlongley wrote: And then you get into colors that color blind people cannot distinguish. My brother in law cannot tell the difference between red and green, which would usually be considered contrasting colors.

How does he know what to do at a stoplight?

sjfcontrol wrote:

jimlongley wrote: And then you get into colors that color blind people cannot distinguish. My brother in law cannot tell the difference between red and green, which would usually be considered contrasting colors.

How does he know what to do at a stoplight?

Okay, off-topic, but it can be a real problem for those that are color blind for either red or green. Some are color blind for blue or a mix of any of those three colors. A friend of mine was color blind for green and had learned to cope with it and adjusted for such things like driving and traffic lights. Basically, if he didn't see either the red or yellow light, he assumed it as green, but also relied on the conduct of the other vehicles. It was really interesting about 20 years ago when he purchased a new car when he drove it for the first time at night. It was at that time he discovered the lighting for the dash and nearly all the controls were green. He couldn't see anything. I don't remember what, exactly, he did with the car, but he had to get rid of it. Otherwise, folks with this issue just learn to adapt, but some career paths are out of the question.