Improper sign on outside of medical facility

[Embalmo]

I often worry that gun detecting technology will someday become inexpensive and when it does ignorant store owners and employees will become dangerous. I would love open carry, but with the current environment, I wouldn't be able to carry anywhere because Bozos and cops would constantly yell, "You can't bring that thing in here!" when it's really perfectly legal.

Embalmo

[marksiwel]

I often worry that gun detecting technology will someday become inexpensive and when it does ignorant store owners and employees will become dangerous. I would love open carry, but with the current environment, I wouldn't be able to carry anywhere because Bozos and cops would constantly yell, "You can't bring that thing in here!" when it's really perfectly legal.

Embalmo

Metal dectors are an old Tech and you still rarely see them.

heck alot of places have turned off their shop lifting alarms because they dont want to pay the service anymore.

[PvilleStang]

I guess I should preface this a little better. I work at this clinic, and one of the named partners is a CHL holder who says he does not want CH's on the premises. It being a clinic, I could respect that he doesn't want his patients disrobing and leaving a gun in a less than secure place. BUT hopefully no one's that stupid. But the argument came about (and I haven't said a WORD to anyone that's an owner or could act in such manner) with a coworker I was working with on site (I was contract labor at the time) and he claimed that the sign was grandfathered in (bad information). I only discussed this at that point because I was getting ready to send off my paperwork, and I asked in passing what's the deal with the signs. Which brings me to an interesting question:

They actually ask you if you posess a CHL in an interview before they hire you on there (since I was contract labor, I was not interviewed). I know if you answer yes, they make a giant skeet storm (had to edit there, sorry for the corny wordage) over not carrying to work. I personally chose at that point, for the benefit of my employer at the time and their relationship with said clinic, to leave my gun in the car (once I obtained my plastic, of course).

[jimlongley]

why call attention to their wrong sign?i would just walk in like you know nothing about it.

For the life of me, I can not comprehend the inner compulsion of some CH licensees and/or CH applicants to point out and debate legally defective "no-guns-allowed" signage.

Be comfortable in our superior knowledge and "let sleeping dogs lie". The sign is either legal or it is not. It does not require our input with facility employess/management.

And I can't, for the life of me, understand why anyone, CHL or not, word ignore obviously defective signage and allow it to go on existing without comment.

At a minimum anyone who puts up such signage will cause you problems if they discover you are carrying, and we have empirical evidence, right here on the forum, that inadvertant discovery can happen and can result in a CHLer being cuffed and stuffed, and that cuffing and stuffing then depends on someone above the level of the street LEO to know what the law really is and turn you loose.

Instead of risking your CHL on the remote possibility that you will be able to walk away unscathed if you just happen to be discovered, instead you should insist that whoever posts should post properly or not post at all. Force them to put up the ugly sign instead of the merely decorative one, give them no alternative, don't just blithely walk past assuming that they don't mean you, or that they don't mean what the sign says. How do you encourage and effect change without letting them know?

And I think it should be written into the law that way, clearly, that they have two choices, to put up the big ugly sign, or no sign.

And let them know that the presence of a sign, whether proper or not, reduce their revenue because you will not do business there and you will influence anyone that you can to boycott them also.

Why would any right thinking CHL holder allow such a blight on the landscape to go on existing? Yes concealed means concealed, but accidents happen.

[Fire1141]

Agreed. I would never tell a business if their signage is not legal. If your their, that probably means that you will continue to go their. Why would you possibly kill your chances to not be able to carry, assuming they get the correct signage put up because of your (chl holder) input?

[Embalmo]

why call attention to their wrong sign?i would just walk in like you know nothing about it.

For the life of me, I can not comprehend the inner compulsion of some CH licensees and/or CH applicants to point out and debate legally defective "no-guns-allowed" signage.

Be comfortable in our superior knowledge and "let sleeping dogs lie". The sign is either legal or it is not. It does not require our input with facility employess/management.

And I can't, for the life of me, understand why anyone, CHL or not, word ignore obviously defective signage and allow it to go on existing without comment.

At a minimum anyone who puts up such signage will cause you problems if they discover you are carrying, and we have empirical evidence, right here on the forum, that inadvertant discovery can happen and can result in a CHLer being cuffed and stuffed, and that cuffing and stuffing then depends on someone above the level of the street LEO to know what the law really is and turn you loose.

Instead of risking your CHL on the remote possibility that you will be able to walk away unscathed if you just happen to be discovered, instead you should insist that whoever posts should post properly or not post at all. Force them to put up the ugly sign instead of the merely decorative one, give them no alternative, don't just blithely walk past assuming that they don't mean you, or that they don't mean what the sign says. How do you encourage and effect change without letting them know?

And I think it should be written into the law that way, clearly, that they have two choices, to put up the big ugly sign, or no sign.

And let them know that the presence of a sign, whether proper or not, reduce their revenue because you will not do business there and you will influence anyone that you can to boycott them also.

Why would any right thinking CHL holder allow such a blight on the landscape to go on existing? Yes concealed means concealed, but accidents happen.

Is this sracasm? It doesn't sound like sarcasm.

[Keith B]

I can tell you it is not sarcasm. I don't really want to answer for Jim, but I believe I know where he is coming from. Bottom line, the company putting up th sign believes that have provided proper notice, and if you are found carrying, they will be calling the police. You may be in a jurisdiction that the PD believes that a sign posted (valid or not) is proper and they will arrest you (aka Grapevine PD and Grapevine Mills Mall.) In the end, you may beat the rap, but will still take the ride, and probably need your lawyer riding shotgun (pun intended )

Jim is just stating that the best way to handle it is to try and get them to remove the sign. If that doesn't work, then get them to post a legal sign so ALL CHL's know it is officially off limits, you are not wanted there, and there is no question that you can't carry there and will not run the risk of being arrested. The deal about going past signs that are at least an attempt at trying to provide notice is asking for nothing but a fight. I personally, like Jim, would rather see a valid sign and not do business with them than try to play the gray area and not know what the outcome will be.

Jim, if I misstated your intent, please correct it.

[Embalmo]

I think we call all agree that going on a crusade to correct all non-compliant signage will either cause the law to be reinterpreted so than any sign type is compliant, even if it's in Russian, or it will cause an upsurge in complaint signs, even from shops who had otherwise posted nothing.

The concealed carry law was passed to enable us to protect ourselves despite the liberals' fear, naivety, and ignorance that more people will be killed due to firearm access. Business owners must be just just as accountable to the concealed handgun laws as we are and be just as responsible to educate themselves as we are; there would be no leniency if we were to deviate from the law as many business owners have deviated through their their non-compliant signage. The law is quite unambiguous when it comes to sign compliance, despite examples of LEO ignorance and the prevalence of liberal opinion.

As I mentioned, the law is what it is and must be obeyed by all parties. If anyone here would prefer that carry laws should be further restricted, or overturned, the proper way to do it is to write one's state representative.

Embalmo

[PvilleStang]

Again, I'm of the same frame of mind. As much as I support my 2nd ammendment rights, I don't want to risk a felony charge attempt at me because I challenged a sign silently. i don't want the owners (of who were paying my income at the time) calling the police and having me hauled off in that rare case they discovered I was carrying. As illegal as the signs are, cops can be just as corrupt. Granted, I wished a few times I did have my gun on me (several incidents in the parking lot which HIPAA may or may not prohibit me from speaking about on here, so I'll just assume leave it at that), but I would rather not start a storm of controversy.

That being said, any other place I'm not spending 8 hours a week at that has a gun busters sign out front, I'll take my chances silently.

On a side note, do the signs at the front booths at Traders' Village in Houston count for valid 30.06 signs? Don't they need to be posted on an entrance, rather than a toll plaza? I mean, I was asleep on the way in to the park, and never even saw the signs. The only reason I hear they're posted on there is from older posts, but haven't actually seen them.

[Embalmo]

Again, I'm of the same frame of mind. As much as I support my 2nd ammendment rights, I don't want to risk a felony charge attempt at me because I challenged a sign silently. i don't want the owners (of who were paying my income at the time) calling the police and having me hauled off in that rare case they discovered I was carrying. As illegal as the signs are, cops can be just as corrupt. Granted, I wished a few times I did have my gun on me (several incidents in the parking lot which HIPAA may or may not prohibit me from speaking about on here, so I'll just assume leave it at that), but I would rather not start a storm of controversy.

That being said, any other place I'm not spending 8 hours a week at that has a gun busters sign out front, I'll take my chances silently.

On a side note, do the signs at the front booths at Traders' Village in Houston count for valid 30.06 signs? Don't they need to be posted on an entrance, rather than a toll plaza? I mean, I was asleep on the way in to the park, and never even saw the signs. The only reason I hear they're posted on there is from older posts, but haven't actually seen them.

We can't worry about "corrupt" police, illegal signage, or pretend laws; it's just too much information to take in. All we can do is follow the law, which indicates that we are to keep the weapons concealed and our mouths shut about it. Seriously, how is a business who posts an illegal sign going to know if a CHL is carrying, when it is illegal for us to tell anyone about it anyway?

The only way that a properly concealed firearm should be outed is in a self defence situation and the cops and lawyers will be all about that regardless of where it happens.

Embalmo

[Sidro]

My question is does the owner carry on premises? If so is he at odds with the law as to the property being posted? Is he legal to carry since he is in control of the property (despite even a legal sign) ? Just wondering.

[ScottDLS]

My question is does the owner carry on premises? If so is he at odds with the law as to the property being posted? Is he legal to carry since he is in control of the property (despite even a legal sign) ? Just wondering.

One would assume the owner would have "effective consent" of the owner (himself) to be on the property thereby unlikely to be charged w/ criminal trespass (30.05). And being the owner would be "on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control..." and thereby exempt from UCW (46.02).

A sign can only serve as "notice" in accordance with a criminal statute, not make something illegal in and of itself.

[Teamless]

when it is illegal for us to tell anyone about it anyway?

is it illegal to tell anyone about it?
I know its illegal to pull it out (other than as defined in the penal code)

Also, you do not have to be carrying to discuss it, and you do not have to even possess a CHL to inform them.

[WildBill]

For the life of me, I can not comprehend the inner compulsion of some CH licensees and/or CH applicants to point out and debate legally defective "no-guns-allowed" signage.

Be comfortable in our superior knowledge and "let sleeping dogs lie". The sign is either legal or it is not. It does not require our input with facility employess/management.

My theory is that they are not "comfortable with their knowledge" and they have a need to feel superior by pointing out non-compliant signs to facility employees/management.

Sometimes knowledge is power, but only if you keep it to yourself.

Edited for proper credit for quotation.

[PvilleStang]

My question is does the owner carry on premises? If so is he at odds with the law as to the property being posted? Is he legal to carry since he is in control of the property (despite even a legal sign) ? Just wondering.

I couldn't tell ya. I've never seen a print of a gun, and haven't talked to him about any of this, since I'm not informing anyone other than the gentleman I spoke of before (and he won't bother to bring this up to the boss man).