TexasCHLforum.com

pushpullpete wrote:

mloamiller wrote:

pushpullpete wrote: however, you broke the 'spirit' of the law when you saw & disregarded the 'illegal' sign and that kind of action can shine an unfavorable light on the whole 'responsible gun owner' thing that most of us are trying to put forward.

We'll have to disagree on that. The law is very clear on what a business owner is required to do. If they haven't put enough effort into finding out what that requirement is and then implementing it correctly, that's on them.

I am being responsible in that I have put in the effort to know what the law states.

Yes, we will have to. That was why I called it the 'SPIRIT' of the law & not the law itself.
...
Grab them by the throat and push their face in it (like I've done most of my life), yes it will get your point across but, the end
result (after they call the police) will NOT be what you want or expect. There is a lot of money on both sides of this argument & finesse is needed for our side much more than a heavy hand.

I don't believe ignoring an invalid sign - especially one that is "clearly" invalid as stated in the original scenario - is violating the "spirit" of the law, nor is it being heavy handed.
The "spirit" of the 30.06/30.07 laws seem to be:

• 1. Business have the right to prohibit those with a license from carrying in their establishments, either concealed or openly.
  2. To avoid confusion that would result from a myriad of signs varying in size, wording, language and location, there are specific requirements for signs that are targeted specifically at licensed holders. This also protects license-holders from situations where a sign is deliberately posted to cause such confusion.

There is a difference between the spirit of the law, and the possible intent/desire of a business holder that posts an invalid sign. Does ignoring an invalid sign violate their intent? Perhaps, but trying to decipher the intent of someone else is tricky. Perhaps the business owner posted an invalid sign because he doesn't want guns in his store, but just doesn't know the law. Or, perhaps he posted an invalid sign, knowing it was invalid and wouldn't impact license holders who know better, but would appease their anti-gun customers. Who knows? That's why there are specific requirements spelled out.

If ignoring an invalid sign is violating the spirit of the law, what about going into a business that doesn't have any signs posted but whose corporate offices have publicly stated they don't want guns in their stores (Whataburger, Starbucks, etc.)? Those would seem to be the same situation - in neither case has the business followed the legal requirements to prohibit licensed carry, but they have made their desires known in some fashion. It seems to me, they are the ones violating the spirit of the law by not even attempting to follow it.

As for being heavy handed, I don't see how ignoring an invalid sign, but fully cooperating if/when asked leave even comes close to that.

pushpullpete wrote: however, you broke the 'spirit' of the law when you saw & disregarded the 'illegal' sign and that kind of action can shine an unfavorable light on the whole 'responsible gun owner' thing that most of us are trying to put forward.

We'll have to disagree on that. The law is very clear on what a business owner is required to do. If they haven't put enough effort into finding out what that requirement is and then implementing it correctly, that's on them.

I am being responsible in that I have put in the effort to know what the law states.

JALLEN wrote:Here is a scenario:

You and a small group of friends meet at a restaurant for dinner. On the way in, you notice a clearly invalid 30.06 sign near the door. Your pistol is concealed, so no worries.

During dinner, you are asked to pass the catsup and, half standing, reach across the large table to hand it to another. A few minutes later, the hostess stops by and tells you that your pistol was noticed while you were stretched out across the table, that weapons are not allowed in the restaurant, and you must either take it to your car, and would then be welcome to return, or leave if not.

1. Do you take the pistol out to the car and return, weaponless? Or

2. Point out that the sign out front is non compliant, therefore meaningless, and return to your chicken fried steak? Or

3. Leave promptly and do not return, leaving the bill unpaid? The others finish their meal and pay their portion. Or

4. The entire party leaves right then, without paying?

At the point the hostess tells me weapons are not allowed, the sign is no longer an issue; I've been given verbal notice so I have to leave. However, given that the sign was invalid, and that is why I came in with my pistol in the first place, my initial response would be to ask the hostess how she would like to handle the bill for the dinner. Since I'm not being allowed to remain and finish it, I'm certainly not paying for it, and if I leave, we're all leaving. So it's her choice. I will absolutely leave right then, not paying for a meal I'm not being allowed to finish, or I will finish my meal, with my firearm in it's holster, pay the check and leave, never to return. I'll abide by whichever route she or the management decide to take. If the hostess or management start to argue the issue, I'll also point out why their sign is invalid,why I was within my rights to ignore it, and what they should do to prevent issues such as this in the future.

In short, I would be very cooperative, letting them know that if they insist that I leave before I finish my meal, I will absolutely do that, but I won't pay for a meal they won't let me finish. This changes the discussion from being about guns to being about their allowing me to either finish (and pay for) the meal, or leave immediately; they are in the driver's seat and I'm being cooperative. If they continue to insist I leave immediately and pay the check, I might go ahead and do that, or I might just walk out without paying. It would depend entirely on how heated things got. One thing I would not do in that situation is stay.

As of January 1, ignoring a properly posted 30.06 or 30.07 sign is a Class C misdemeanor, assuming you leave immediately if you're notified to do so:

30.06/30.07 (d) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $200, except that the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if it is shown on the trial of the offense that, after entering the property, the license holder was personally given the notice by oral communication described by Subsection (b) and subsequently failed to depart.

Texas Penal Code states that a Class C misdemeanor (same classification as traffic tickets) is punishable only by a fine:

12.03 (c) Conviction of a Class C misdemeanor does not impose any legal disability or disadvantage.

12.23. CLASS C MISDEMEANOR. An individual adjudged guilty of a Class C misdemeanor shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $500. (30.06/30.07 limit this to $200.)

Unless it's a repeated offense:

12.43 (c) If it is shown on the trial of an offense punishable as a Class C misdemeanor under Section 42.01 or 49.02 that the defendant has been before convicted under either of those sections three times or three times for any combination of those offenses and each prior offense was committed in the 24 months preceding the date of commission of the instant offense, the defendant shall be punished by:
(1) a fine not to exceed $2,000;
(2) confinement in jail for a term not to exceed 180 days; or
(3) both such fine and confinement.

But then there is this possible "gotcha":

12.01 (c) This chapter does not deprive a court of authority conferred by law to forfeit property, dissolve a corporation, suspend or cancel a license or permit, ...

No details are included about what "license" might be impacted, so I guess it's theoretically possible you could loose your LTC, but I guess the same chances would apply to losing your LTC and/or driver's license for speeding.

As noted by other posts, there is no legal penalty for ignoring a non-compliant 30.06/30.07 sign. Just know what the possible consequences are if discovered, especially if it's "close." You could end up arguing the finer points of "contrasting colors" with a LEO and/or judge. However, even with that, jail time would not be likely, just a fine. Personally, I ignore them.

As for the red-circle "gun-busters" signs, those are directed only at criminals.