Signs vs Case Law?

[Zen]

I always find the discussions on posted signs and locations to be interesting.

We analyze the sign for accuracy, we ponder the reasoning behind putting up non-legal signs, and make our own decisions as to whether we will continue to carry there or no patronize the said business.

I'm curious, though. Has there been any cases confronting such sign issues? Has there been a case where a CHL holder continued to carry, was discovered, and subsequently forced to defend him/herself in court?

Would one really have their case dropped because the letters, on an otherwise legal sign, were only 3/4" vs 1"?

Would the addition of a word not in the law break the spirit of the law?

[seamusTX]

No. As far as I know, no one as ever been convicted of a 30.06 violation.

I just want to remind people, case law means that someone was convicted of a crime, appealed the verdict, and had it upheld or reversed by an appeals court.

Having charges dropped, being no-billed by a grand jury, or found not guilty at trial is not case law.

- Jim

[jmra]

Over the last 5 years there has been on average 10 CHL holders convicted per year of unlawful carry of a handgun. No way of knowing if these convictions involved signs or not.

[seamusTX]

Unlawful carry would be PC 46.02. I'm willing to go out on a limb and say most if not all of these were DWI arrests. It would be interesting to know the details, but I don't have the time or energy to look them up.

DWI by an armed CHL holder should be 46.035(d), but anyone who thinks these things are done by the book has another think coming.

- Jim

[jmra]

Unlawful carry would be PC 46.02. I'm willing to go out on a limb and say most if not all of these were DWI arrests. It would be interesting to know the details, but I don't have the time or energy to look them up.

DWI by an armed CHL holder should be 46.035(d), but anyone who thinks these things are done by the book has another think coming.

- Jim

You could be right. The PDFs on the site I was looking at did not reference the codes they were charged under.

[seamusTX]

The PDFs on the site I was looking at did not reference the codes they were charged under.

That has been a frustration since the beginning.

Anyway, a CHL holder who has been convicted of a weapons violation has to have messed up big-time.

- Jim

[oohrah]

seamusTX is correct. According to a Dallas Morning News article, the number one offense committed by CHLers is DWI. Number two is illegal carry. They probably happened at the same time.