TexasCHLforum.com

I was just watching this Houston Town hall forum on Open Carry. About 35 minutes in the lasy with the brown hair on the end (forgot who she was) state that there was new verbage on the 30.06 sign. I had not seen nor can I find anything about this. I am assuming she misstated. Anybody know?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiEUK5ilQhc

More than likely she is actually referring to the new 30.07 signs that prohibit open carry only. A business is supposed to post BOTH signs if they wish to prohibit ALL guns.

Erick Drake wrote:More than likely she is actually referring to the new 30.07 signs that prohibit open carry only. A business is supposed to post BOTH signs if they wish to prohibit ALL guns.

That is what I am assuming too but she said all business will have to replace their 30.06 to meet new requirements.

The verbage on the 30.06 sign changed as well, so all old signs will be noncompliant. HB910 as enrolled:

(A)AAa card or other document on which is written
language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06,
Penal Code (trespass by license holder with [of license to carry] a
concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter
411, Government Code ([concealed] handgun licensing law), may not
enter this property with a concealed handgun";

[] = text removed.

Current

Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun

New (Jan 1st)

Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code ( handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun

Great! Thank you. I had not seen this and I wanted to make sure my PP is upto date for Jan 1st!!

mommagamber wrote:Great! Thank you. I had not seen this and I wanted to make sure my PP is upto date for Jan 1st!!

PP?

Edit: Nevermind, I'm betting you mean PowerPoint.

The difference in verbiage is a nit too small for me to pick.

To be honest, I don't stop to read the signs. I see "Section 30.06" & "Subchapter H, Chapter 411" and if the letters look close to 1" tall, I don't carry. Now if the letters look 1/2" or smaller, I'll carry right past it. I figure that someone was trying to cheat the system and not post the "big ugly sign".

Isn't a minimally compliant sign somewhere near 2' x 3' big?

And if I'm not mistaken the 30.06 and 30.07 signs only apply to us license holders, right? Not someone open carrying a rifle/shotgun?

Pawpaw wrote:The difference in verbiage is a nit too small for me to pick.

To be honest, I don't stop to read the signs. I see "Section 30.06" & "Subchapter H, Chapter 411" and if the letters look close to 1" tall, I don't carry. Now if the letters look 1/2" or smaller, I'll carry right past it. I figure that someone was trying to cheat the system and not post the "big ugly sign".

I feel it is my responsiblity as an instructor to teach the right verbage!!

Keep in mind, the law actually states:

PC §30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED
HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was
forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and
failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the
property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice
to the person by oral or written communication.

It would appear to me that the sign itself, as well as the actual verbiage is simply semantics. Written or oral communication, by any means, coming from an owner or authorized individual holds the same weight as a proper 30.06 sign. I could be wrong, but I would never chance it. The statute seems to indicate that even an "illegal" gun buster sign could constitute "notice".

-Erick Drake

locke_n_load wrote:The verbage on the 30.06 sign changed as well, so all old signs will be noncompliant.

On January 1 and a long time thereafter, I wonder how many CCers will stroll right past those newly invalidated signs, starting all kinds of problems. I wonder if police are being taught that they can't arrest people for violating the current 30.06 sign. I wonder if the police will be getting a flurry of phone calls from hysterical business owners complaining that some guy with a gun ignored their "official sign" and if dispatcher training has covered this topic.

It's clear, and has been for some time, that many businesses don't know squat about what a 30.06 sign is, what its requirements are to be valid, etc. We all see invalid 30.06 signs all the time, even those silly gunbuster decals. I'm sure HUGE numbers of businesses will have no clue that their signs are suddenly invalid as of 1/1/16, and a year later they'll still be posted.

Erick Drake wrote:The statute seems to indicate that even an "illegal" gun buster sign could constitute "notice".

That's an interesting suggestion. Any comments?

Erick Drake wrote:Keep in mind, the law actually states:

PC §30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED
HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was
forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and
failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the
property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice
to the person by oral or written communication.

It would appear to me that the sign itself, as well as the actual verbiage is simply semantics. Written or oral communication, by any means, coming from an owner or authorized individual holds the same weight as a proper 30.06 sign. I could be wrong, but I would never chance it. The statute seems to indicate that even an "illegal" gun buster sign could constitute "notice".

-Erick Drake

Except you missed the relevant part AFTER that:

(c) In this section:
(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
(2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or

(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.

Ruark wrote:

Erick Drake wrote:The statute seems to indicate that even an "illegal" gun buster sign could constitute "notice".

That's an interesting suggestion. Any comments?

jrs_diesel wrote:Isn't a minimally compliant sign somewhere near 2' x 3' big?

And if I'm not mistaken the 30.06 and 30.07 signs only apply to us license holders, right? Not someone open carrying a rifle/shotgun?

Most of them are about that size. However, I've seen one with a very narrow font that was much smaller than usual. The letters were still about or at least 1 inch in height. It was not easy to read from not very far away due to the narrow font.