TexasCHLforum.com

KD5NRH wrote:

austinrealtor wrote:In the context, verbal notice may or may not be valid under PC 30.06 depending upon whether the verbal notice was oral or written and if written did it conform to requirements of the statute for written communication.

So Morse code via armpit-noises wouldn't be binding, but actually speaking the dits and dahs might be?

If you reasonably understood it to mean you couldn't carry, sure! XD

On AR's note earlier, the difference between oral and verbal is very important. I freely admit to constantly mixing them up myself XD
The Statute states 'oral', which means you must physically be told, from another person's mouth.

Now, something else to ponder... Could Stephen Hawking give 'Oral' notice?

chefkristian wrote:

dicion wrote: Second.... the LEO had no authority to tell you not to carry there (not being the owner, or representative of the owner). But by taking it further, If the preacher told you not to carry there, however, THAT qualifies as notice under 30.06. You pretty much messed up there.

Well that cleared up my post, thanks.

Well, the rub on 'verbal notice' is yes, while it is legally sufficient according to the law, how can you 'Prove' you gave someone verbal notice?
Without a recording, witnesses, or some other proof it becomes your word versus theirs. In a court of 'beyond a reasonable doubt' that generally wouldn't stand.

elwood blooz wrote:... He also mentioned that he wasn't carrying his weapon....

That should tell you all you need to know right there...
Apparently this LEO doesn't believe that bad things can happen anywhere, so I wouldn't trust his judgment on anything else, personally.
Just my 2c.


Second.... the LEO had no authority to tell you not to carry there (not being the owner, or representative of the owner). But by taking it further, If the preacher told you not to carry there, however, THAT qualifies as notice under 30.06. You pretty much messed up there.