Sign question

[Soccerdad1995]

Saw this over the weekend, and this is a new one for me. The English letters meet the 1 inch requirement, but the Spanish letters are way too small. Is it legal to CC / OC past these signs?

[URL=http://s649.photobucket.com/user/P ... .jpg[/img][/url]

[URL=http://s649.photobucket.com/user/P ... .jpg[/img][/url]

[mr1337]

(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 license holder with a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing 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.

Don't see anywhere in there where the 1 inch requirement is limited to only the English portion of the sign.

Please keep in mind that I'm not a lawyer.

[Pawpaw]

If a person only spoke Spanish, they might be able to get by walking past those signs. I'm not trying it.

[joe817]

I would NOT pass by that sign if I were carrying. The intent is blatantly obvious. They certainly do not want my business, so I will oblige them by going someplace else.

For those that argue the point, I invite you to carry past that sign, and be the test case.

[JP171]

(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 license holder with a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing 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.

Don't see anywhere in there where the 1 inch requirement is limited to only the English portion of the sign.

Please keep in mind that I'm not a lawyer.

folks check the red. I think that that means that BOTH have to be at least 1 inch in height, not just the English part, the Spanish parts are not stand alone nor are they ignored

[goose]

If a person only spoke Spanish, they might be able to get by walking past those signs. I'm not trying it.

This is my thought. I would be hard pressed to convince anyone that I can't read English. I'm not going past it. More to the point, I would be hard pressed to convince anyone I comprehended the Spanish portion to begin with.

A person that speaks no English.......maybe.

[Bryanmc]

folks check the red. I think that that means that BOTH have to be at least 1 inch in height, not just the English part, the Spanish parts are not stand alone nor are they ignored

Yes but as a person who primarily speaks English, the part of the sign meant for you is fine. IANAL either but I think it would be a losing battle to argue (in English) with a LEO that the Spanish part wasn't correct.

[ScottDLS]

If you concealed and carried past it you wouldn't be breaking the law, since the sign doesn't meet the requirements as specified by statute. You risk getting wrongly ticketed if discovered, and having to argue your case to a municipal or JP court or pay the $200.

[Soccerdad1995]

If you concealed and carried past it you wouldn't be breaking the law, since the sign doesn't meet the requirements as specified by statute. You risk getting wrongly ticketed if discovered, and having to argue your case to a municipal or JP court or pay the $200.

I wouldn't just pay the $200 as I wouldn't want any firearm related infraction on my record. But I don't think there would be much of an "argument" other than showing the judge a picture of the sign and the wording of the law. The bigger argument would be for the civil suit against the establishment's manager who filed a false police complaint that lead to you having to show up in court in the first place. That one might at least be a bit interesting.

That said, I would not carry past anything remotely resembling a 30.07 sign simply because there is a high likelihood of triggering effective verbal notice when management sees your weapon.

On a side note, why are we so afraid of "taking a ride" on an invalid charge when there are a ton of government officials who are not afraid of being investigated by the AG for something that is actually against the law? In both cases, the potential for significant punishment is minimal, yet we are much more cautious and afraid than those in government. I think that says something about where we have gotten to as a nation. And it ain't good.

[goose]

On a side note, why are we so afraid of "taking a ride" on an invalid charge when there are a ton of government officials who are not afraid of being investigated by the AG for something that is actually against the law?

I realize that this is probably a rhetorical question, but the real answer is a tough one to swallow. WE pay if we take a ride. Be it in time, or lost wages, or inconvenience to those that get to come pick us up. WE pay if a ton of government officials are investigated. We pay both times. The government officials rarely have money actually taken out of their pockets. We will potentially have money taken out of ours.

I don't know that "affraid" is the word I would use. Most of us are electing to choose other battles and/or spend our resources elsewhere. Granted the validity of that can be debated plenty. I'm not going to be remorseful or feel like I am not doing my civic duty because I choose to not carry past a 30.06/07 sign in valid English, my native language. If it is a civic duty issue for some, I'm sure not reading about them walking past many either.

[Soccerdad1995]

On a side note, why are we so afraid of "taking a ride" on an invalid charge when there are a ton of government officials who are not afraid of being investigated by the AG for something that is actually against the law?

I realize that this is probably a rhetorical question, but the real answer is a tough one to swallow. WE pay if we take a ride. Be it in time, or lost wages, or inconvenience to those that get to come pick us up. WE pay if a ton of government officials are investigated. We pay both times. The government officials rarely have money actually taken out of their pockets. We will potentially have money taken out of ours.

I don't know that "affraid" is the word I would use. Most of us are electing to choose other battles and/or spend our resources elsewhere. Granted the validity of that can be debated plenty. I'm not going to be remorseful or feel like I am not doing my civic duty because I choose to not carry past a 30.06/07 sign in valid English, my native language. If it is a civic duty issue for some, I'm sure not reading about them walking past many either.

Well at the risk that someone will track me down and decide to have me falsely arrested, I will admit that I have carried past an invalid sign that had some resemblance to a valid 30.06 sign (can't really say "invalid 30.06 sign" because if it is invalid then it ain't a 30.06 sign).

When I say "afraid" I am not talking about people who choose to shop elsewhere. I agree with those folks reasoning and see no fear in their actions. I am talking about those who will disarm to shop at the store with an invalid sign. That is where I see fear as at least partially driving their actions.

[JP171]

folks check the red. I think that that means that BOTH have to be at least 1 inch in height, not just the English part, the Spanish parts are not stand alone nor are they ignored

Yes but as a person who primarily speaks English, the part of the sign meant for you is fine. IANAL either but I think it would be a losing battle to argue (in English) with a LEO that the Spanish part wasn't correct.

1 bazillion percent sir

[goose]

Well at the risk that someone will track me down and decide to have me falsely arrested, I will admit that I have carried past an invalid sign that had some resemblance to a valid 30.06 sign (can't really say "invalid 30.06 sign" because if it is invalid then it ain't a 30.06 sign).

When I say "afraid" I am not talking about people who choose to shop elsewhere. I agree with those folks reasoning and see no fear in their actions. I am talking about those who will disarm to shop at the store with an invalid sign. That is where I see fear as at least partially driving their actions.

I don't disagree with you. I have also carried past several invalid signs, gunbusters and just weirdly worded signs. (They'd have to know which ones you carried past, and their validity to even begin to falsely arrest you, I would think.) I guess there is just a grey area in there, for me, where I haven't/wouldn't carry past a sign, even invalid as shown in the pictures, where the English portion was accurately worded and of proper contrast and size. The penalties and the ability to beat them may well be black and white. It is the ability to talk an officer out of the ride that may well be a wide grey area. Gun buster, I walk past. I think a quick google search or request for a commanding officer would likely get you out of a ride. A "valid-ish" English sign (verbiage, size, etc)......again, might beat the penalty; might not beat the ride. And at the end of the day there may be no right answer. We're all just weighing risk and reward; wondering about the knowledge and disposition of the officer that answers the call.

[locke_n_load]

why do you think you would be taking a ride for a class C misdemeanor in the first place and not just written a ticket on the spot? Free ride to the station is not usually the norm for class C misdemeanors.

[goose]

why do you think you would be taking a ride for a class C misdemeanor in the first place and not just written a ticket on the spot? Free ride to the station is not usually the norm for class C misdemeanors.

I think that it is a fair question. I would hope that the officer in question knows the laws and statutes. I also honestly don't know what all a person could be charged with depending on the officers disposition.

Is there a way to know if anyone in the state has even been ticketed? 06 or 07? I think you raise a good one.

Granted, someone can still fear being a test case. But if no one has been ticketed yet, or if no one has taken a ride............seems like a low threshold.