Does 30.06 have a huge loophole involving notice?

[stingeragent]

Ok, so I've just been re reading over the law trying to stay up to date, and saw the portion where it says "“Notice” means oral or written communication by the owner or someone with apparent authority
to act for the owner" Couldn't they just slap a note on the door that says no guns. That wouldn't be true to the 30.06 required sign, but it does meet the definition of written communication. I'm sure im completely wrong but just wanted to throw it out there, as the law doesn't state the owner has to physically hand you written notice, it just says you have to be notified by written communication. Thoughts?

[longhorn86]

Written communication requires the exact language in 30.06 to be valid, oral communication does not, if you are asked to leave, you must or face the penalty.

[C-dub]

They may have to actually hand it to you themselves because once it's posted up on a door or window or whatever, it's a sign and that has to meet certain size requirements.

[tiger1279]

Maybe I'm too nice and compliant, but my attitude toward "notice" is this: if I know that a certain business does not want guns on their premises I either don't go there or I don't carry if I do go there. I'm not going to press the issue over a technicality on the signage. It's just not worth it to me to have a confrontation with the business when it is so easily avoidable. I'm guided in this by the principle "staying out of trouble is a lot easier than getting out of trouble."

[Rex B]

I would expect written notice to be proper 30.06 (and 30.07) included in the employee handbook for that company. Employees are typically required to sign for receipt of the handbook, including revised versions during ongoing employment.

[txglock21]

I would expect written notice to be proper 30.06 (and 30.07) included in the employee handbook for that company. Employees are typically required to sign for receipt of the handbook, including revised versions during ongoing employment.

I work for a city government, so they can't post 30.06 or 30.07 for the public, BUT they have it in the city directive that EMPLOYEES can't carry or we can be terminated. In other words, it's not illegal, but they can fire you. It's not written in proper 30.06 or 30.07 wording, but still binding. BTW, they do allow to store in our private vehicles and luckly my parking spot is in a secured area.

[Abraham]

To each his own, but if a business simply posts a gun buster type sign, I go in concealed.

[doncb]

The law states written or verbal communication. Certain requirements were written into the law for written communication. The law states the wording and requirements for the written communication. Anything else doesn't meet the legal requirements of the law. I guess you could say that a gun buster sign indicates "intent" but there are legal requirements that have to be met because we are licensed. In my mind, if we have to meet certain legal requirements to carry, a business owner should have to meet legal requirements to prevent it. Verbal is face to face so it does not have to meet the same requirements.

One reason why I will not OC is because if I am in a business that does not have a legal sign, I don't want the manager or owner verbally telling me to leave. Concealed is concealed and every body gets along. If I am CC then no one should be able to tell I am carrying anyway.

(As a side note, our company put a clause in the manual this year that employees are not allowed to "transport" firearms in a company provided lease vehicle. So I can't "transport" my guns to the range, but I consider the fact that I "carry" and have a license to "carry" then I'm not "transporting". One of my co workers that also carries put it this way - "I'd rather be unemployed and alive, than employed and dead.")

[The Wall]

I treat businesses as private property.