Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

[ScottDLS]

The public lobby at the Harris County Sheriff's processing center is now posted with a big red ugly 30.06 sign. This is on the public side where there is no access to the secure side.

I suggest open carrying in there...if you're willing to risk "the ride". The rid should be short since you're already at the Sheriff's office.

[chasfm11]

The public lobby at the Harris County Sheriff's processing center is now posted with a big red ugly 30.06 sign. This is on the public side where there is no access to the secure side.

I suggest open carrying in there...if you're willing to risk "the ride". The rid should be short since you're already at the Sheriff's office.

Perhaps it is just me, but I don't high expectations of getting a fair trial on a gun issue in Harris County......or Travis County. The presence of the sign in the first place tells me their regard for the law.

[ScottDLS]

The public lobby at the Harris County Sheriff's processing center is now posted with a big red ugly 30.06 sign. This is on the public side where there is no access to the secure side.

I suggest open carrying in there...if you're willing to risk "the ride". The rid should be short since you're already at the Sheriff's office.

Perhaps it is just me, but I don't high expectations of getting a fair trial on a gun issue in Harris County......or Travis County. The presence of the sign in the first place tells me their regard for the law.

Presumably they could only charge you with a class C 30.07. And it's clear law that it doesn't apply on government property. My guess would be interfering with a police officer, or disorderly conduct. Those are nice vague catch all crimes that equate to "LEO thinks you're annoying".

[Papa_Tiger]

The public lobby at the Harris County Sheriff's processing center is now posted with a big red ugly 30.06 sign. This is on the public side where there is no access to the secure side.

I suggest open carrying in there...if you're willing to risk "the ride". The rid should be short since you're already at the Sheriff's office.

Perhaps it is just me, but I don't high expectations of getting a fair trial on a gun issue in Harris County......or Travis County. The presence of the sign in the first place tells me their regard for the law.

Presumably they could only charge you with a class C 30.07. And it's clear law that it doesn't apply on government property. My guess would be interfering with a police officer, or disorderly conduct. Those are nice vague catch all crimes that equate to "LEO thinks you're annoying".

Just like "failure to maintain assured clear distance" is the catch all for "you were involved in an automobile accident and we think you should pay, regardless of whose fault it is."

[OldCurlyWolf]

Just like "failure to maintain assured clear distance" is the catch all for "you were involved in an automobile accident and we think you should pay, regardless of whose fault it is."

Too bad I don't see DPS or Sheriff's Deputies pulling over those who either didn't learn or have forgotten the meaning of the words "Following Distance".
I "REALLY LOVE" those who ride my bumper at less than 50 feet when they should be over 200 feet back. Or the Idiots who cut in front at highway speeds at LESS than 20 feet from my front bumper. It has been down as low as under 5 feet.

Excuse my rant, I just seriously dislike other drivers putting my life in danger when they are careless with their own.

As to HCSO, to the HC Sheriff, Either obey the law or go to jail. I would love to see him in the HCSO jail. Or pay the fines out of his own pocket.

[Papa_Tiger]

Or the Idiots who cut in front at highway speeds at LESS than 20 feet from my front bumper. It has been down as low as under 5 feet.

Guess who gets cited for "failure to maintain assured clear distance" in this case if there is an accident? Not the person who was rear-ended...

[Soccerdad1995]

The public lobby at the Harris County Sheriff's processing center is now posted with a big red ugly 30.06 sign. This is on the public side where there is no access to the secure side.

Can you get me a picture? I would love to file a complaint against this illegal act.

[bigity]

Are the procedures in this thread still correct?

The South Plains Fair has posted 30.06/.07 signs at the entrance to the South Plains Fairgrounds in Texas, which is owned (as far as I can tell) by Lubbock County, making the signs invalid.

I know the AG has ruled that the governmental entity cannot be fined for something a third party has done (was anything passed this last session to deal with this?), but where do I document/submit this as an invalid sign?

[ELB]

Are the procedures in this thread still correct?

The South Plains Fair has posted 30.06/.07 signs at the entrance to the South Plains Fairgrounds in Texas, which is owned (as far as I can tell) by Lubbock County, making the signs invalid.

I know the AG has ruled that the governmental entity cannot be fined for something a third party has done (was anything passed this last session to deal with this?), but where do I document/submit this as an invalid sign?

There are no changes to fines-for-signs law last legislature, unfortunately.

The Texas AG web page for sign complaints is here:
https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/3006/3006-complaints

[ninjabread]

History shows that filing a complaint with the current AG over 30.06 signs is like teaching a rock to swim.

[ELB]

Just took a look at the OAG's Ruling Letters page again.

The Texas Office of the Attorney General has issued 30 Ruling Letters covering complaints about government entities posting signs or providing oral communications in violation of the signs-for-fines law. There were four instances where the OAG received two complaints about the same possible violation, so 34 complaints about 30 possible violations.

In 14 cases, before the OAG came to a determination, the government entity that was the target of the complaint notified the OAG that it had removed the illegally posted signs. The OAG marked theses instances as Resolved and closed the complaint. In most cases signs were removed entirely; in at least a couple, county governments either moved security access points or moved entire offices in order to comply with both the law and their own security requirements.

In seven cases the OAG found no violation. In four cases this was because the signs in question were posted by private entities, not "A state agency or a political subdivision of the state...". The law does not forbid private entities leasing land from or to a state agency from posting 30.06 signs, it only forbids state actors. No violations were found in each of three other instances as follows: school exception for a school administration building, amusement park (Dallas Zoo), and a case where the signs were visible outside a government room ONLY when the room was being used as a municipal court or a government meeting subject to open records act rules was being held (signs are covered at all other times).

In one case the OAG determined there was a violation and the county was issued a violation letter and a deadline. The county then moved some offices around so that they came into compliance with the law, and the OAG closed the complaint.

In six cases, the OAG determined there is a violation. One of those is against the City of Austin, and concerns a multi-use building that houses courtrooms and non-court buildings. The OAG has sees the language of the law referring to courts and offices used by the courts (which may be posted against licensed carry) very narrowly -- in his opinion it only refers to actual courtrooms and offices used by the judge. Austin refuses to accept this view and the OAG has taken them to court. Unfortunately this case is not on any kind of expedited schedule it seems. In any case, the OAG has found violations in five other cases where entire multi-use buildings containing courts are off-limits for licensed carry. He has notified them that they are in violation of the law, but will not issue a violation letter with a deadline until the Austin case is settled.

I know that in my city, a number of government posted 30.06 signs were removed as a result of this law, so beyond the formal challenges, I suspect a number of signs came down across the state.

I note that a few posts back sbrawley mentions that a Harris County Sheriff's processing center has a 30.06 in a public access area. If this is indeed the case, take note that the OAG just last month issued a violation letter to the Killeen PD, telling them that while they can post the jail portion of their building off limits to carry, they may not do so with the public access portion: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/fi ... e_Dept.pdf
This would make a good attachment to a complaint to the Harris County Sheriff's Office, followed in three days by one to the OAG.

For government entities that are still posting at this point, they are not going to remove them without somebody complaining, and the OAG is not going to say anything to them unless notified by the complaint process set up in law. I seriously doubt they read this thread just to find new violations...

[Flightmare]

Excellent summary ELB. Thankyou!

[imkopaka]

That was fantastic ELB. Thank you!

[bigity]

So basically these signs come down to a 'beat the rap, but not the ride' situation possibly?