TexasCHLforum.com

Baptist Hospital in Beaumont. The notice is posted 18"- 24" to the left & perpendicular to the sliding door. I missed it on two previous visits. This sign can easily be blocked by traffic.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23775748@N ... otostream/


The right side of the sign is partially obscured.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23775748@N ... otostream/

I consider this sign invalid.


Comments??

It's not obvious, but it is out where everyone could see it. It is very sneaky to post it where they have, but I would not knowingly carry past it. It looks valid to me.

Jim Beaux wrote:Baptist Hospital in Beaumont. The notice is posted 18"- 24" to the left & perpendicular to the sliding door. I missed it on two previous visits. This sign can easily be blocked by traffic.


I consider this sign invalid.


Comments??

You might want to change your mind on that one. Even though it is partially blocked on the right side, people (CHL holders) who know what it is will get the idea.

Up until the time you actually saw it, well, for you, it was not posted.
but now that you have seen it, you have been giving the required notification, and it is legally enforceable.
IANAL but I would not carry past that point any longer if I were you.

I agree that you should not carry past that sign, plus the law says you may not carry in a hospital unless you have specific permission from the hospital.

Richardc wrote:I agree that you should not carry past that sign, plus the law says you may not carry in a hospital unless you have specific permission from the hospital.

not any more -- must post 30.06 if they want to prohibit CHL carry.

I am not asking opinions as to whether to carry past this sign. My position is that this sign is no more valid then a 30.06 having only 3/4" letters. The sign fails to meet legal requirements as it does not accurately communicate the law as it omits mandated text & fails the "(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public. ". The law doesnt state "language similar", it states, "language identical".

To recap: I entered this door two previous times and never saw this sign. When I was leaving I stopped and looked close at the doors and side lights & gave up and turned to leave and saw the sign. It really irked me that this was such a haphazard & confusing sign.

I am really interested in opinions (or facts) based only as to the validity of the sign....And no, dont ask, I dont intend to be a test case.

(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written
language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06,
Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed
handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this
property with a concealed handgun"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by
Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with
block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner
clearly visible to the public.

I will venture to answer your question, Jim, although you may of course continue to insist on a different answer.

That sign is absolutely "valid," (unenforceable "gunbuster" signs on the back of the men's room door are "valid"). One often receives the "wrong" answer to questions which use words which ask a question other than the one intended.

I would go further to suggest, IMHO, that as to you, the sign is also enforceable. As to some others the sign may not be enforceable.

I am sorry if you do not want to hear my answer, but you of course do not have to listen to it. Also, although you say you do not wish to be a test case, that is the only way you are going to be able to settle your obvious uncertainty, one way or another. Ask the judge after you are arrested. There are some very good ones in Beaumont. I know them well. Show him this thread. Tell him that you tried to get the right answer here, but were unsuccessful in doing so, so you are asking him. Read the law to him. He will appreciate that.

Jim

Jim Beaux wrote: displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

That was the point I was making Jim, you saw it, therefore it is conspicuous.
Therefore, it is valid.

If you choose to carry past it, well, imho, you are breaking the law, however, if you choose to break the law, much like when someone speeds, I hope you do not get caught.

Richardc wrote:I agree that you should not carry past that sign, plus the law says you may not carry in a hospital unless you have specific permission from the hospital.

1997 legislature amended that you can carry in hospitals, nursing homes and churches UNLESS they post 30.06.

46.035 (i)  Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.

I can't read the text on this tiny screen so I'm not commenting on that, but otherwise it looks like all we can ask for.

1. It is black letters on a white sign, not white letters on glass
2. It is posted near the door and it is visible from outside.
3. It is posted at a reasonable height, not floor level or ten feet up.
4. It looks big enough.

There are lots of unenforceable attempts at 30.06 I walk past. . . that wouldn't be one of them.

I don't have the exact wording memorized, so I never analyze that. If I see "Pursuant to section 30.06 of the Texas Penal Code". . . and another paragraph of writing, see it in both languages, think it's decently big (not an 8.5x11" piece of paper), and know it's not a government building, I'll disarm. . . or preferably find somewhere else to go.

fickman wrote:There are lots of unenforceable attempts at 30.06 I walk past. . . that wouldn't be one of them.

I don't have the exact wording memorized, so I never analyze that. If I see "Pursuant to section 30.06 of the Texas Penal Code". . . and another paragraph of writing, see it in both languages, think it's decently big (not an 8.5x11" piece of paper), and know it's not a government building, I'll disarm. . . or preferably find somewhere else to go.

I'm also not opposed to entering through a connected building that's not posted or using my "favorite" entrance in some buildings that might not be posted.

If I do that, it has to be a regular public entrance. . . I'm not sneaking in the loading dock to avoid notice, but there are a few places notorious for being posted where I've never received notice.

IF I was confronted at one of these places (very few scenarios come up where I would be) by an officer, I'd honestly say that I didn't receive notice and ask for permission to leave now that I have received it.

Jim Beaux wrote:I am not asking opinions as to whether to carry past this sign. My position is that this sign is no more valid then a 30.06 having only 3/4" letters. The sign fails to meet legal requirements as it does not accurately communicate the law as it omits mandated text & fails the "(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public. ". The law doesnt state "language similar", it states, "language identical".

To recap: I entered this door two previous times and never saw this sign. When I was leaving I stopped and looked close at the doors and side lights & gave up and turned to leave and saw the sign. It really irked me that this was such a haphazard & confusing sign.

I am really interested in opinions (or facts) based only as to the validity of the sign....And no, dont ask, I dont intend to be a test case.

(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written
language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06,
Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed
handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this
property with a concealed handgun"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by
Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with
block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner
clearly visible to the public.

What mandated text has been omitted?

fickman wrote:IF I was confronted at one of these places (very few scenarios come up where I would be) by an officer, I'd honestly say that I didn't receive notice and ask for permission to leave now that I have received it.

Unless you just stopped an active shooter, don't be surprised if he arrests you and lets the DA and judge sort it out.