Return to “Are "split" signs legal???”
Good observation. You passed my test.brainman wrote:I find your choice of plural pronouns ironic.Keith B wrote:
It is up to canons of statutory interpretation to determine the meaning. Since they are attached to one structure, they could be considered one sign. Same with attached to the building. I will be when they apply for a permit to put up signage, they only get one permit no matter how many seperate letters they have for the 'sign'.
Does anyone ever really 'know' the law? Seems like just when you think you do, you realize someone else has a different interpretation and he/she rules a different way.thetexan wrote:....better at knowing the law.
What I am saying is that NO ONE here knows what is and what is not legally a 'sign' in the eyes of the law/courts with respect to 30.06/30.07. SO, you can make your own determinations, but suggest you ere on the side of caution and NOT pass a 'split sign' that meets the requirements of size and wording.thetexan wrote:The problem I have with your example and all other interpretations is that they are YOUR interpretations which you have a right to make FOR YOURSELF. But we must be careful not to assert that your interpretation is anything more than that, an interpretation. Since you do not have any authority to legally make the determination for everyone else, we are are left with going back to the statute itself to determine what it means for ourselves, especially since we are each responsible for that interpretation and how we apply it in our own lives.
You have a great interpretation. Maybe it's correct. Maybe it is not. And still Ole Man Statute just keeps on rollin along, unabridged, unchanged and uneffected by your interpretation of what it says.
tex
OK, is this a sign or signs?thetexan wrote:Here is the logic that covers this...
You can come up with 10000 variations of the law and claim that until someone has ruled that it is just as valid as the next guy's variation. There is only one problem with this, there are a set of rules by which statutes are interpreted. Most of the people engaged in some of these silly arguments are not aware of these rules and have not studied them much less operationally knowledgeable of these rules.
They are called the canons of statutory interpretation and are established by and used by the courts to determine the meaning of the rules legislators write. In fact the canons of statutory interpretation guide the legislators in the very writing of these statutes since they know their statutes will be interpreted by them.
We don't have to guess what conspicuous means, we don't have to guess what the phrase "a sign" means, we don't have to wonder what the word "property" means on a 30.06 sign, and we don't have to guess what an owner's intent is or if it even has any relevance in a statute.
It would do a lot of good if everyone would do a little homework and basic study of the law and statutory interpretation if they intend on intelligently engaging in debates on the law.
tex
And your last line contradicts your middle paragraph. So, until a determination is made in the courts and case law established, you best bet is to sayt a split sign MAY meet the law and could be determined legal in court.thetexan wrote:While this discussion is entertaining it's usefulness to understanding the original point.
All of these interpretations are meaningless. The lower courts will each make their determination as to the interpretations of the law, how the law is applied in your criminal case, and the appellate court, if petitioned will either uphold or reject the lower court's application of the law in your case.
A split sign, better known on planet earth as two signs, is not compliant according to 30.06 or 30.07. English on one and Spanish on another separated by any distant is not compliant according to 30.06 and 30.07. The intent or the owner is irrelavent to the legal application of 30.06 and 30.07; your knowledge or understanding of the owner's intent has no relevance in whether you you commit an offense or not under 30.06 and 30.07.
And any iwner of private property has the right under law to determine who may access his property whether that property is public ally accessible or not.
Whether or not one decides to abide by the notifications of a private owner, required that one determine if proper notification has been given and may do so at his discretion. Each person is well advised to not listen to the guesswork of others for their own decisions.
tex
Here's the deal; you want to try and twist an answer out of something that there is no legal precedence for. Until there is some case law you could make up all kinds of scenarios and 'what if's' to try and get to a black and white answer. There is not one for this, so until there is, then you must assume that split signs carry the weight of the law.Ruark wrote:
Given that a sign which includes ONLY one language isn't legal (although I'd never carry past one), do two "single signs," one English and one Spanish, 25 feet apart meet the requirement? Can we just answer this "yes, because...." or "no, because...."? Is that asking too much?
At this point you are trying any twisted angle to start an argument. There are reasonable exceptions and unrealistic arguments. Stop trying to pick a fight and discuss logically or drop the discussion.Ruark wrote:
So in your opinion, two signs separated by 25 feet constitutes "a sign"? What if they were 40 feet apart? 60? 80? 100? At what point would you stop calling it "a sign"?