I disagree that the museum was clearly trying to meet the statute, it looks to me as if they are trying to use the statute without complying with it - if they were trying to meet it, the sign would be conspicuous, ALL of the letters would be one inch in height, and clearly in contrasting colors, not white on clear.lcarreau wrote:I would not want my defense to hinge on the definition of contrasting colors and block print. The museum clearly was trying to meet the statute and that was good enough for me. I was not happy about it, but I was not going to risk the legal consequences.
-Lonnie
When DPS told me that they would prosecute just for the "good faith" effort to post the sign, even if the sign clearly did not meet the statute, my reaction was to ask if I got stopped for doing 49 in a 40 zone would they let me off because I was making a good faith effort in not going faster than the 40s.
I don't know if the statute needs to be clarified, "block letters at least one inch in height" seems pretty clear, and "displayed in a conspicuous manner" also seems pretty clear too, if anything need to be clarified, it is that the sign need to be two colors with the letters contrasting with the background, which I also feel is pretty obvious in the statute, and that clear is not a background.
I do feel that there should be some sort of penalty incurred for improper posting once the statute has been clarified.