Why two signs?

[Soccerdad1995]

Thanks. Perhaps one could then discretely open carry, i.e. not visible enough to attract attention.

You would have to be very careful with this. "Discreet" open carry could start to get really close to concealed carry, and there is a risk that you could end up on the wrong side of a legal interpretation, especially if by discrete you mean covering part of the weapon or holster with clothing, etc.

That said, I am in the camp that thinks the property owner may not be ignorant and may actually have intended to only ban CC. I also think there is nothing to lose by OC'ing in these stores. If the intent was to only ban CC, then the store owner will be fine. If their intent was to ban all carry, then they may give verbal notice, and you end up in the same position as if you had never entered the store in the first place (can't carry there). The only downside is if the store owner was exceedingly ignorant and actually intended to ban only OC. In that rare case, hopefully they will be open to some education. This last one is probably a moot point, though since the store likely won't be in business long.

[fickman]

Thanks. Perhaps one could then discretely open carry, i.e. not visible enough to attract attention.

You would have to be very careful with this. "Discreet" open carry could start to get really close to concealed carry, and there is a risk that you could end up on the wrong side of a legal interpretation, especially if by discrete you mean covering part of the weapon or holster with clothing, etc.

That said, I am in the camp that thinks the property owner may not be ignorant and may actually have intended to only ban CC. I also think there is nothing to lose by OC'ing in these stores. If the intent was to only ban CC, then the store owner will be fine. If their intent was to ban all carry, then they may give verbal notice, and you end up in the same position as if you had never entered the store in the first place (can't carry there). The only downside is if the store owner was exceedingly ignorant and actually intended to ban only OC. In that rare case, hopefully they will be open to some education. This last one is probably a moot point, though since the store likely won't be in business long.

You don't want to be accused of intentionally failing to unconceal.

[Bitter Clinger]

That's up to you, but since the other bitterclinger has posted something that only Bloomberg could love, you may want to change your username. When I read the OP's post, I thought it was you and wondered what in the world had gotten into you!

Chas.

I'm flattered.

Problem is I really like that handle. Maybe he will see the light?

[puma guy]

Here's a third sign as read by a criminal viewing the other two.

[Bitterclinger]

Question:

If there is only a valid 30.06 sign posted, is open carry still permissible on the premises? Going further, by not posting a valid 30.07 sign has the owner invalidated their 30.06 signage?

The two signs are completely independent of one another. 30.06 only covers concealed carry while 30.07 only covers open.

If the 30.06 is the only one posted, legally you may open carry on the premises; however, more than likely you will be given a verbal notice that carry is not permitted.

The two "Bitter Clingers" are completely independent of one another as well

In the interest of full disclosure, the OP did register the name before I did, and I did not search to see if there was anyone who had already claimed it. I will leave it up to the moderators to tell me if there is a need for me to change my handle.

No, hey! I like it. There should be a whole battalion of us!

[Bitterclinger]

Question:

If there is only a valid 30.06 sign posted, is open carry still permissible on the premises? Going further, by not posting a valid 30.07 sign has the owner invalidated their 30.06 signage?

The two signs are completely independent of one another. 30.06 only covers concealed carry while 30.07 only covers open.

If the 30.06 is the only one posted, legally you may open carry on the premises; however, more than likely you will be given a verbal notice that carry is not permitted.

The two "Bitter Clingers" are completely independent of one another as well

In the interest of full disclosure, the OP did register the name before I did, and I did not search to see if there was anyone who had already claimed it. I will leave it up to the moderators to tell me if there is a need for me to change my handle.

That's up to you, but since the other bitterclinger has posted something that only Bloomberg could love, you may want to change your username. When I read the OP's post, I thought it was you and wondered what in the world had gotten into you!

Chas.

Mr. Cotton, I'm not sure how you were able to misconstrue anything I posted into something that would warrant your harsh and insulting comparison of me to the tyrant Bloomberg. If you would care to elaborate on the point in my post where you became confused, I would be happy to correct your misunderstanding. I have reviewed this post, as well as my previous posts and I can not for the life of me understand what I did to provoke such an attack on my character. I am deeply offend by your calumny, and in a bygone era, I would be compelled to visit your countenance with the back of my glove.

[cyphertext]

Question:

If there is only a valid 30.06 sign posted, is open carry still permissible on the premises? Going further, by not posting a valid 30.07 sign has the owner invalidated their 30.06 signage?

The two signs are completely independent of one another. 30.06 only covers concealed carry while 30.07 only covers open.

If the 30.06 is the only one posted, legally you may open carry on the premises; however, more than likely you will be given a verbal notice that carry is not permitted.

The two "Bitter Clingers" are completely independent of one another as well

In the interest of full disclosure, the OP did register the name before I did, and I did not search to see if there was anyone who had already claimed it. I will leave it up to the moderators to tell me if there is a need for me to change my handle.

That's up to you, but since the other bitterclinger has posted something that only Bloomberg could love, you may want to change your username. When I read the OP's post, I thought it was you and wondered what in the world had gotten into you!

Chas.

Mr. Cotton, I'm not sure how you were able to misconstrue anything I posted into something that would warrant your harsh and insulting comparison of me to the tyrant Bloomberg. If you would care to elaborate on the point in my post where you became confused, I would be happy to correct your misunderstanding. I have reviewed this post, as well as my previous posts and I can not for the life of me understand what I did to provoke such an attack on my character. I am deeply offend by your calumny, and in a bygone era, I would be compelled to visit your countenance with the back of my glove.

I'm not Mr. Cotton, but I'll take a stab at this...

Not to mention the fact that both signs are the same kind of defacto waste of space as software EULAs which are invariably read and observed by absolutely no one.

With this statement, you are stating that CHLers don't abide by the law. There is a whole website dedicated to reporting locations with 30.06 and 30.07 signs so that folks with CHLs know to avoid these businesses when carrying (or just plain avoid)... so someone is reading them.

They subject business owners to unnecessary controversy and expense, to say nothing of the legal implications if they fail to post the proper sign.

Here, you worry more about the expense to a business owner more than the 2A right of the people.

This may also represent my misunderstanding of the situation, but the signs mean practically nothing to non CHL holders who could get the same warm-fuzzy from a gun-buster sign. We are the only people for whom it makes any legal difference, so couldn't we get by with something like an unobtrusive state seal with a simple 30.06 or 30.07 on it?

The signs are not there for non CHL holders... and they are supposed to be large to insure that you do not inadvertently walk past one. The law recently changed to make carrying in a place that is legally posted a class C misdemeanor, but previously it was a class A, which would result in the loss of your license.

[Bitterclinger]

Question:

If there is only a valid 30.06 sign posted, is open carry still permissible on the premises? Going further, by not posting a valid 30.07 sign has the owner invalidated their 30.06 signage?

The two signs are completely independent of one another. 30.06 only covers concealed carry while 30.07 only covers open.

If the 30.06 is the only one posted, legally you may open carry on the premises; however, more than likely you will be given a verbal notice that carry is not permitted.

The two "Bitter Clingers" are completely independent of one another as well

In the interest of full disclosure, the OP did register the name before I did, and I did not search to see if there was anyone who had already claimed it. I will leave it up to the moderators to tell me if there is a need for me to change my handle.

That's up to you, but since the other bitterclinger has posted something that only Bloomberg could love, you may want to change your username. When I read the OP's post, I thought it was you and wondered what in the world had gotten into you!

Chas.

Mr. Cotton, I'm not sure how you were able to misconstrue anything I posted into something that would warrant your harsh and insulting comparison of me to the tyrant Bloomberg. If you would care to elaborate on the point in my post where you became confused, I would be happy to correct your misunderstanding. I have reviewed this post, as well as my previous posts and I can not for the life of me understand what I did to provoke such an attack on my character. I am deeply offend by your calumny, and in a bygone era, I would be compelled to visit your countenance with the back of my glove.

I'm not Mr. Cotton, but I'll take a stab at this...

Not to mention the fact that both signs are the same kind of defacto waste of space as software EULAs which are invariably read and observed by absolutely no one.

With this statement, you are stating that CHLers don't abide by the law. There is a whole website dedicated to reporting locations with 30.06 and 30.07 signs so that folks with CHLs know to avoid these businesses when carrying (or just plain avoid)... so someone is reading them.

Fist off, no. I'm stating nothing of the kind. I'm not even implying that by any stretch of the imagination. I'm only saying that the wording and presentation of the sign is similar to the End User Licens Agreements (EULA) that we all click on without (be honest) reading. Personally, I just look for the number 30.06.

They subject business owners to unnecessary controversy and expense, to say nothing of the legal implications if they fail to post the proper sign.

Here, you worry more about the expense to a business owner more than the 2A right of the people.

Again, no. I'm far less worried about that, but I am somewhat worried about it from a public perception standpoint. I hope to one day see the whole CCL buracracy replaced by "constitutional carry," and if the business world is constantly subjected to gun-rights compliance issues, I worry that they will not look favorably on that end. I doubt Bloomberg shares my concerns on this or any other position.

This may also represent my misunderstanding of the situation, but the signs mean practically nothing to non CHL holders who could get the same warm-fuzzy from a gun-buster sign. We are the only people for whom it makes any legal difference, so couldn't we get by with something like an unobtrusive state seal with a simple 30.06 or 30.07 on it?

The signs are not there for non CHL holders...

This is exactly my point! As a CHL holder, I KNOW THAT A BUSINESS CAN PROHIBIT CARRY. We all went to a lengthy and expensive class and paid a tax, so we should all know that. Why not allow a business to post a more discreet sign that WE are responsible to observe, but does not a) require entrepreneurs to follow convoluted compliance requirements, and b) advertise to the world that the entrapurner has elected to create an ostensibly "gun free" zone where only criminals will have firearms? If I expect people to honor my rights, I must be willing to honor thiers, even in the case of companines who want to prohibit guns. They have a right to do so, and me trying to make it hard on them might cause unnecessary blow-back.

[cyphertext]

Question:

If there is only a valid 30.06 sign posted, is open carry still permissible on the premises? Going further, by not posting a valid 30.07 sign has the owner invalidated their 30.06 signage?

The two signs are completely independent of one another. 30.06 only covers concealed carry while 30.07 only covers open.

If the 30.06 is the only one posted, legally you may open carry on the premises; however, more than likely you will be given a verbal notice that carry is not permitted.

The two "Bitter Clingers" are completely independent of one another as well

In the interest of full disclosure, the OP did register the name before I did, and I did not search to see if there was anyone who had already claimed it. I will leave it up to the moderators to tell me if there is a need for me to change my handle.

That's up to you, but since the other bitterclinger has posted something that only Bloomberg could love, you may want to change your username. When I read the OP's post, I thought it was you and wondered what in the world had gotten into you!

Chas.

Mr. Cotton, I'm not sure how you were able to misconstrue anything I posted into something that would warrant your harsh and insulting comparison of me to the tyrant Bloomberg. If you would care to elaborate on the point in my post where you became confused, I would be happy to correct your misunderstanding. I have reviewed this post, as well as my previous posts and I can not for the life of me understand what I did to provoke such an attack on my character. I am deeply offend by your calumny, and in a bygone era, I would be compelled to visit your countenance with the back of my glove.

I'm not Mr. Cotton, but I'll take a stab at this...

Not to mention the fact that both signs are the same kind of defacto waste of space as software EULAs which are invariably read and observed by absolutely no one.

With this statement, you are stating that CHLers don't abide by the law. There is a whole website dedicated to reporting locations with 30.06 and 30.07 signs so that folks with CHLs know to avoid these businesses when carrying (or just plain avoid)... so someone is reading them.

Fist off, no. I'm stating nothing of the kind. I'm not even implying that by any stretch of the imagination. I'm only saying that the wording and presentation of the sign is similar to the End User Licens Agreements (EULA) that we all click on without (be honest) reading. Personally, I just look for the number 30.06.

They subject business owners to unnecessary controversy and expense, to say nothing of the legal implications if they fail to post the proper sign.

Here, you worry more about the expense to a business owner more than the 2A right of the people.

Again, no. I'm far less worried about that, but I am somewhat worried about it from a public perception standpoint. I hope to one day see the whole CCL buracracy replaced by "constitutional carry," and if the business world is constantly subjected to gun-rights compliance issues, I worry that they will not look favorably on that end. I doubt Bloomberg shares my concerns on this or any other position.

This may also represent my misunderstanding of the situation, but the signs mean practically nothing to non CHL holders who could get the same warm-fuzzy from a gun-buster sign. We are the only people for whom it makes any legal difference, so couldn't we get by with something like an unobtrusive state seal with a simple 30.06 or 30.07 on it?

The signs are not there for non CHL holders...

This is exactly my point! As a CHL holder, I KNOW THAT A BUSINESS CAN PROHIBIT CARRY. We all went to a lengthy and expensive class and paid a tax, so we should all know that. Why not allow a business to post a more discreet sign that WE are responsible to observe, but does not a) require entrepreneurs to follow convoluted compliance requirements, and b) advertise to the world that the entrapurner has elected to create an ostensibly "gun free" zone where only criminals will have firearms? If I expect people to honor my rights, I must be willing to honor thiers, even in the case of companines who want to prohibit guns. They have a right to do so, and me trying to make it hard on them might cause unnecessary blow-back.

You do realize how long we have had CC in Texas, right? And we have had signage requirements since the inception. The signage requirements are a compromise. We honor the businesses right to prohibit carry, however to do so they have to post a sign meeting certain specifications. This is to protect the license holder. If you want to make it where the sign has no weight of law, then I might agree with you... but as long as I can face a penalty for missing a sign, I want it to be large and identical, anywhere I go.

[mojo84]

Question:

If there is only a valid 30.06 sign posted, is open carry still permissible on the premises? Going further, by not posting a valid 30.07 sign has the owner invalidated their 30.06 signage?

The two signs are completely independent of one another. 30.06 only covers concealed carry while 30.07 only covers open.

If the 30.06 is the only one posted, legally you may open carry on the premises; however, more than likely you will be given a verbal notice that carry is not permitted.

The two "Bitter Clingers" are completely independent of one another as well

In the interest of full disclosure, the OP did register the name before I did, and I did not search to see if there was anyone who had already claimed it. I will leave it up to the moderators to tell me if there is a need for me to change my handle.

That's up to you, but since the other bitterclinger has posted something that only Bloomberg could love, you may want to change your username. When I read the OP's post, I thought it was you and wondered what in the world had gotten into you!

Chas.

Mr. Cotton, I'm not sure how you were able to misconstrue anything I posted into something that would warrant your harsh and insulting comparison of me to the tyrant Bloomberg. If you would care to elaborate on the point in my post where you became confused, I would be happy to correct your misunderstanding. I have reviewed this post, as well as my previous posts and I can not for the life of me understand what I did to provoke such an attack on my character. I am deeply offend by your calumny, and in a bygone era, I would be compelled to visit your countenance with the back of my glove.

The condescension is quite heavy in this post.

The idea of uniform signs of a certain size are a benefit to both the business and licensee. Do you really want to be subjected to having to search out a small non-uniform sign everyone you enter a place? What if you missed the small sign and then had to spend a significant amount of money defending yourself against criminal charges and the lose because you didn't see a small no gun or gunbuster sign behind a rack?

Seems like you are here just to stir the pot.

[Soccerdad1995]

Question:

If there is only a valid 30.06 sign posted, is open carry still permissible on the premises? Going further, by not posting a valid 30.07 sign has the owner invalidated their 30.06 signage?

The two signs are completely independent of one another. 30.06 only covers concealed carry while 30.07 only covers open.

If the 30.06 is the only one posted, legally you may open carry on the premises; however, more than likely you will be given a verbal notice that carry is not permitted.

The two "Bitter Clingers" are completely independent of one another as well

In the interest of full disclosure, the OP did register the name before I did, and I did not search to see if there was anyone who had already claimed it. I will leave it up to the moderators to tell me if there is a need for me to change my handle.

That's up to you, but since the other bitterclinger has posted something that only Bloomberg could love, you may want to change your username. When I read the OP's post, I thought it was you and wondered what in the world had gotten into you!

Chas.

Mr. Cotton, I'm not sure how you were able to misconstrue anything I posted into something that would warrant your harsh and insulting comparison of me to the tyrant Bloomberg. If you would care to elaborate on the point in my post where you became confused, I would be happy to correct your misunderstanding. I have reviewed this post, as well as my previous posts and I can not for the life of me understand what I did to provoke such an attack on my character. I am deeply offend by your calumny, and in a bygone era, I would be compelled to visit your countenance with the back of my glove.

The condescension is quite heavy in this post.

The idea of uniform signs of a certain size are a benefit to both the business and licensee. Do you really want to be subjected to having to search out a small non-uniform sign everyone you enter a place? What if you missed the small sign and then had to spend a significant amount of money defending yourself against criminal charges and the lose because you didn't see a small no gun or gunbuster sign behind a rack?

Seems like you are here just to stir the pot.

If business owners have a problem with signage requirements, they are free to post any sign they want that conveys their desires. Those signs just don't equate to a legal trespass warning, so the owner would need to verbally inform a customer that they don't want them carrying in their store, after they see that someone is carrying (either OC or a sloppy CC). This is precisely the approach that Whataburger is taking, absent any signage at all.

Most businesses banning guns say they are doing this to calm the fears of those who don't want to "see" guns. Those businesses can easily accomplish this goal by posting a gun buster sign, or no sign at all, and then politely letting people know that exposed guns are not welcome if and when they see one.

The signage provisions just provide another way for businesses owners to keep guns away from the delicate eyes of their anti customers. If they don't like those provisions, they don't need to post any signs at all (ala Whataburger).

[fickman]

If I expect people to honor my rights, I must be willing to honor thiers, even in the case of companines who want to prohibit guns. They have a right to do so, and me trying to make it hard on them might cause unnecessary blow-back.

We honor the businesses right to prohibit carry, however to do so they have to post a sign meeting certain specifications. This is to protect the license holder. If you want to make it where the sign has no weight of law, then I might agree with you... but as long as I can face a penalty for missing a sign, I want it to be large and identical, anywhere I go.

I want to respectfully disagree. I am a major fan of property rights, but their rights do not trump my right to privacy. For open carry, they absolutely should be allowed to ban my firearm. For concealed carry, they can have a policy about it, but without a means to detect it, they have no authority to enforce it unless I fail to conceal.

It's simplistic, but I like the following analogy.

A business can ban anybody from wearing a green shirt. Green shirt wearers are not a protected class. They can post a sign (it would not carry the force of law), but if you still enter, they can ask you to leave. Failing to do so would be trespassing.

They can have a similar policy banning green underwear, but unless I fail to conceal my underwear, they have no way to enforce it. It's none of their business as long as I keep my underwear concealed. They can guess, or, leaving the analogy and going back to guns, they can get a metal detector to find them. Outside of that, concealed is concealed, and my rights to privacy trump their policy.

I know that many disagree with me, but I keep offering this viewpoint hoping to persuade people over time.

If you want to make it where the sign has no weight of law, then I might agree with you... but as long as I can face a penalty for missing a sign, I want it to be large and identical, anywhere I go.

In my opinion, removing the penalty from 30.06 (concealed carry only) is a key next step, along with expanding where CHLers can carry to align with off duty / retired LEOs.

[para driver]

let's not give the anti's any ideas about changing the sign requirements.. the Texas legislature, WISELY made the effort to CLEARLY define the sign requirements. It's been done this way for a reason(s).

[Bitterclinger]

Wow. Ok other bitterclinger, she's all yours.

[Bitter Clinger]

Wow. Ok other bitterclinger, she's all yours.

Thanks, I think. The best fight is the one you avoid.