TexasCHLforum.com

My wife talked me into going to the "Rat Pack" at the Hobby Center.

I was planning on carrying, as I normally due.

However, i was wondering if the "Hobby Center" is posted 30.06 or 51% or any other exclusion that would not allow me to carry my concealed PF-9 in my pocket.

In that area, I would fell a lot better is I was carrying.

Thanks

Charles

Hobby Center was reported as 30.06 posted a few weeks ago: http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... f=7&t=1334

- Jim

I was just there today taking a class.

They are very much posted on every door and since the windows are tinted, the letters are white and 1" high and also in spanish, the posting is regulation.

The question is that since the Hobby Theatre is owned by the city but managed by TUTS (Theatre Under the Stars), can athey restrict CHL? Tuts is a private non-profit theatre group based in Houston.

I guess you lawyerly types may have to answer that one.

Personally, I do not want to be the test case.

TDDude wrote:I was just there today taking a class.

They are very much posted on every door and since the windows are tinted, the letters are white and 1" high and also in spanish, the posting is regulation.

The question is that since the Hobby Theatre is owned by the city but managed by TUTS (Theatre Under the Stars), can athey restrict CHL? Tuts is a private non-profit theatre group based in Houston.

I guess you lawyerly types may have to answer that one.

Personally, I do not want to be the test case.

Hobby Center is not managed by TUTS. It is managed and (according to them) 'owned' by Hobby Center for the Performing Arts, which is a subsidiary of Houston Music Hall Foundation. All are non-profits. TUTS is simply a tenant. There is some question as to whether the facilities are owned or leased by HCPA, but I believe there is no question that the land is city-owned.

The main theatre, housing Sarofim and Zilkha Halls, is posted only on the front doors. The Admin building is not posted, nor is the stage door, side entries or 2nd floor breezeway entry from the Admin building.

My mistake on the TUTS information. I did some work at Hobby when it was built and the way TUTS was calling the shots, one would think they were "da-man".

Anyway, the only doors posted are the front entrance doors. Side & loading dock doors are not.

Well boys and girls I can tell you while the front doors might be posted, they are NOT legal signs and therefore the Hobby Center is NOT posted as of today.

The verbiage is indeed there, however the law is very clear that the words must be written on a contrasting background. As you can see from the picture the words are adhesive white letters placed on a semi transparant glass. Ask a woman in a white skirt to stand behind the glass and what do you have?
Nope, nada, not legal.

.

dqstacy wrote:Well boys and girls I can tell you while the front doors might be posted, they are NOT legal signs and therefore the Hobby Center is NOT posted as of today.

The verbiage is indeed there, however the law is very clear that the words must be written on a contrasting background. As you can see from the picture the words are adhesive white letters placed on a semi transparant glass. Ask a woman in a white skirt to stand behind the glass and what do you have?
Nope, nada, not legal.

Disclaimer: IANAL.

Whether it contrasts enough is open to debate and AFAIK has not been tested in court. And until case law is present on it, there will be debate.

However, if this is all there is to the sign, then it would not be legal since it is not presented in English AND Spanish.

I do appreciate your comment and believe in your right to air it.

However, it isn't about "contrasting enough"; there is no such thing as enough. Glass is NOT a contrasting material when someone can be seen through it.

The Spanish is there I just didn't take a picture of it..

Here is a direct quote of the law.....

(ii) appears in contrasting colors with
block letters at least one inch in height; and

dqstacy wrote:I do appreciate your comment and believe in your right to air it.

However, it isn't about "contrasting enough"; there is no such thing as enough. Glass is NOT a contrasting material when someone can be seen through it.

The Spanish is there I just didn't take a picture of it..

there might not be such a thing as 'contrasting enough', but 'contrast' is present.

con⋅trast
to exhibit unlikeness on comparison with something else; form a contrast.

white vinyl is unlike glass. that is all the court needs to know.

IANAL.

I bet if one get's caught, that dude is going to jail, contrast or not......

TDDude wrote:I bet if one get's caught, that dude is going to jail, contrast or not......

It's enough of a contrast to me that I won't carry there. I certainly don't have the funds to finance my attorney's carribean vacation.

easy way to see if the letters are big enough: if the letters are as tall as a quarter, they are legal.
A quarter is 31/32's of an inch in diameter.