How identical is identical?

[gmckinl]

If I missed this in my search of this site, I apologize in advance.

I’ve been sign watching lately. I noticed that the DPS is not consistent in the required wording of a legal 30.06 sign.

The pdf version of the Penal Code (LS-16, dated Jan 2006) says:
________________________________________________________________
(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
________________________________________________________________

But if instead you go to:
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administra ... osting.htm
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administra ... lssign.htm

these DPS websites state:

In order to provide notice that entry on property by a license holder with a concealed handgun is forbidden, Penal Code Section 30.06(c)(3)(A) requires that a written communication contain the following language:
________________________________________________________________

"PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06, PENAL CODE (TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF A 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."
________________________________________________________________

So the examples have an extra “A� and are missing a required comma IAW the copy of the PC that they publish. The signs I’ve seen match the examples and not the penal code.

So where does that leave us legally? Is the LS-16 just a bad copy of the real statute? While not “identical� would it be considered close enough? I am NOT volunteering to be a test case.

[txinvestigator]

It does not matter what DPS says, it matters what the law says.

And to be frank, all of this nonsense about commas, missing letter "A"s, what exactly is a "block letter" are they all caps, the letters are only 8/9 of an inch tall, glass is not a contrasting color, ad nauseam; is just that, nonsense.

If the sign is obviously compliant by good faith then obey it. we are all adults and know the intent.

And forgive me for going off on YOUR thread. I have been biting my tongue (metaphorically) about this in several threads.

No offense to you meant.

[gmckinl]

It does not matter what DPS says, it matters what the law says.

Thanks. That's exactly my point. What is the law. If it truly means 1 inch equals >=1, then 0.9 doesn't cut it. I guess I'm just ate up with it since my profession deals w/ words and punctuation; "shall" means you must do it, "will" or "must" or anything other than "shall" means you don't have to... it's not a requirement. All requirements shall contain the word "shall".

Yes, I too heard the bit about clear glass not being a color and the law referring to colors (plural), there again what is reality?

Specific example. If we are to adhear to "intent", what about the school down the street from me. It has the entrance to the pull thru drive marked with a 30.06 sign which if compliant would preclude you from pulling in and dropping off the kidos. It is done in 3/4 inch letters (I measured them). Even forgetting the "a" and "," issues, does this then satisfy your criteria for meeting the intent and I should not enter? Regardless of the fact that it simply does not comply w/ the stated requirements in PC 30.06. Like the thread title says, how identical is identical?

BTW, nothing personal to you, I'm just amazed at how loosey goosey the laws are compared to what I deal w/ daily. Notice I didn't even get into significant digits or tolerance issues w/ the 1 inch number.

Thanks TXI for all your advice.

[Right2Carry]

It does not matter what DPS says, it matters what the law says.

And to be frank, all of this nonsense about commas, missing letter "A"s, what exactly is a "block letter" are they all caps, the letters are only 8/9 of an inch tall, glass is not a contrasting color, ad nauseam; is just that, nonsense.

If the sign is obviously compliant by good faith then obey it. we are all adults and know the intent.

And forgive me for going off on YOUR thread. I have been biting my tongue (metaphorically) about this in several threads.

No offense to you meant.

I agree with your assesment on this.

[KD5NRH]

And to be frank, all of this nonsense about commas, missing letter "A"s, what exactly is a "block letter" are they all caps, the letters are only 8/9 of an inch tall, glass is not a contrasting color, ad nauseam; is just that, nonsense.

If the sign is obviously compliant by good faith then obey it. we are all adults and know the intent.

I'll remember that next time I'm pulled over for just mixing the numbers on the speed limit sign up a bit while making a good faith attempt to drive safely.

[Frost]

This post has inspired me, and i now have a signature for this board.

[txinvestigator]

And to be frank, all of this nonsense about commas, missing letter "A"s, what exactly is a "block letter" are they all caps, the letters are only 8/9 of an inch tall, glass is not a contrasting color, ad nauseam; is just that, nonsense.

If the sign is obviously compliant by good faith then obey it. we are all adults and know the intent.

I'll remember that next time I'm pulled over for just mixing the numbers on the speed limit sign up a bit while making a good faith attempt to drive safely.

Yeah, that makes sense.

[txinvestigator]

It does not matter what DPS says, it matters what the law says.

Thanks. That's exactly my point. What is the law. If it truly means 1 inch equals >=1, then 0.9 doesn't cut it. I guess I'm just ate up with it since my profession deals w/ words and punctuation; "shall" means you must do it, "will" or "must" or anything other than "shall" means you don't have to... it's not a requirement. All requirements shall contain the word "shall".

Yes, I too heard the bit about clear glass not being a color and the law referring to colors (plural), there again what is reality?

Specific example. If we are to adhear to "intent", what about the school down the street from me. It has the entrance to the pull thru drive marked with a 30.06 sign which if compliant would preclude you from pulling in and dropping off the kidos. It is done in 3/4 inch letters (I measured them). Even forgetting the "a" and "," issues, does this then satisfy your criteria for meeting the intent and I should not enter? Regardless of the fact that it simply does not comply w/ the stated requirements in PC 30.06. Like the thread title says, how identical is identical?

BTW, nothing personal to you, I'm just amazed at how loosey goosey the laws are compared to what I deal w/ daily. Notice I didn't even get into significant digits or tolerance issues w/ the 1 inch number.

Thanks TXI for all your advice.

Hey man, I appreciate your thoughts and I see your point. I just don't get all of the hubub. (that is a word, right?)

We do the best we can to obey the law; at least I HOPE we do. Being hyper-literal and seeking out "loopholes" is counter to what being a CHL holder is about, IMO. We should err on the side of caution.

If your school is a "public" school, then it is a government entity location and a 30.06 is not enforceable there.

[txinvestigator]

This post has inspired me, and i now have a signature for this board.

lol

[gmckinl]

If your school is a "public" school, then it is a government entity location and a 30.06 is not enforceable there.

Good point. Wish I'd thought of that. I've noticed several schools in the Plano area have put up the same model of 30.06 sign (must have got a group discount).

[KD5NRH]

And to be frank, all of this nonsense about commas, missing letter "A"s, what exactly is a "block letter" are they all caps, the letters are only 8/9 of an inch tall, glass is not a contrasting color, ad nauseam; is just that, nonsense.

If the sign is obviously compliant by good faith then obey it. we are all adults and know the intent.

I'll remember that next time I'm pulled over for just mixing the numbers on the speed limit sign up a bit while making a good faith attempt to drive safely.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Well, rulers and copies of the exact text required are easy to come by, so how can you call ignoring clear, concise instructions a good faith effort on their part, and yet say that it's not good faith on my part if I decide that the speed limit sign must have the same leeway?

Never mind that pretty much every sign shop I've ever worked with preferred lettering in inch or half-inch increments, and loved to work with block capitals, (they're all the same height, so you can line them up top and bottom) you'd think they'd save themselves some grief (and quite possibly money) by just handing the sign shop a copy of the law and telling them "we need a sign that fulfills this, and will work with our color scheme."

It also makes me wonder if the sign shops might be on our side; it seems like they and their anti-gun customers would benefit if they'd all just offer a standard, legal 30.06 sign. (The shops benefit by having it standardized, and being able to keep a few on hand, the customers by not having to pay a setup charge for a one-off sign.) Instead, it's almost like they're conspiring to not get the signs quite right in so many cases, and in some odd ways; ISTR someone describing a black-on-maroon sign, (that would take a really odd definition of contrast) 3/4 inch letters, (not a custom cut, but less common than 1") and of course, vinyl letters on glass, which is a good bit more hassle than nailing up a premade sign.

[seamusTX]

People find it difficult to do things for the first time, or at long intervals. That's just the way it is. Every now and then I run across lists of goofy signs like "Shoes and shirt must be worn to be served."

There's not enough demand for 30.06 signs to lead anyone to mass-produce them, and there's no penalty for doing them wrong.

- Jim

[shootthesheet]

I only obey compliant signs. The law was made, as such, to protect both CHL holders and those posting. That said, I do not measure the signs or check the exact placement of a letter here or there. However, transparent glass is not a contrasting color and the sign will be ignored by me if I ever see one. I think a CHL holder will get off because of any technical problem with the sign if they will use it as a defense. The problem is that to get off takes a date before the Judge. My life is worth that if I am forced to chance entering a place that has a "close enough" sign. I do not enter any posted place if I have any choice in the matter and tell them why. Freedom is the heart to risk losing what I have to do what is right and nothing to do with rebellion. That is my opinion.

[phddan]

If the sign is obviously compliant by good faith then obey it. we are all adults and know the intent.

I respect your opinion, but I think you are wrong on this. If the sign can not be posted per what the law specifies, than it is non compliant sign. Period.

. we are all adults and know the intent.

Would like to think so. So what is the problem with the DA's that can't figure out the intent of the travelling law?

Dan

[txinvestigator]

If the sign is obviously compliant by good faith then obey it. we are all adults and know the intent.

I respect your opinion, but I think you are wrong on this. If the sign can not be posted per what the law specifies, than it is non compliant sign. Period.

. we are all adults and know the intent.

Would like to think so. So what is the problem with the DA's that can't figure out the intent of the travelling law?

Dan

Whatever. If you are measuring letters and carrying when a letter is missing from a sign, don't expect a LEO to share your sentiments.