TexasCHLforum.com

I repair organs and digital keyboards and as such I go to a significant number of Churches. Since the OC law has been enacted, a large number of these Churches are posting both 30.06 and 30.07 signs at their entrances. So I have pretty much stopped carrying. I have had several discussions with church personnel and the guards. It seems in several cases, they had people open carrying in their church and decided to put up the signs. In most cases though, it was done to stop OC but either due to misinformation or even a push from the sign company, they got both.

I have offered that the signs only stop the good guys etc. etc. etc. but it seems they are where they are with no incentive to change. They allow members to carry and larger churches have guards or even police protection. An armed guard even told me to just carry on as long as it's concealed! Then yesterday I see a comment on FB concerning the Orlando shooting where people are saying if they had laws like in Texas and people had been armed, fewer people would have died. I mentioned that carrying past a 51% sign in Texas is not allowed. A response was that it's only a class C misdemeanor, indicating it's not that bad to do it.

I'm a little confused here, I was always under the impression carrying past any sign that legally prevented carrying was very bad and could lead to losing your license. Thoughts?

Geo

geoelectro wrote:I repair organs and digital keyboards and as such I go to a significant number of Churches. Since the OC law has been enacted, a large number of these Churches are posting both 30.06 and 30.07 signs at their entrances. So I have pretty much stopped carrying. I have had several discussions with church personnel and the guards. It seems in several cases, they had people open carrying in their church and decided to put up the signs. In most cases though, it was done to stop OC but either due to misinformation or even a push from the sign company, they got both.

I have offered that the signs only stop the good guys etc. etc. etc. but it seems they are where they are with no incentive to change. They allow members to carry and larger churches have guards or even police protection. An armed guard even told me to just carry on as long as it's concealed! Then yesterday I see a comment on FB concerning the Orlando shooting where people are saying if they had laws like in Texas and people had been armed, fewer people would have died. I mentioned that carrying past a 51% sign in Texas is not allowed. A response was that it's only a class C misdemeanor, indicating it's not that bad to do it.

I'm a little confused here, I was always under the impression carrying past any sign that legally prevented carrying was very bad and could lead to losing your license. Thoughts?

Geo

I'll start with the good news. Since a security officer at one of the churches told you that you could carry concealed, that effective notice overrides the sign and you can legally carry there. This works the same in reverse aas well (if a security guard tells you no CC where there are no signs, then you cannot carry there).

If you are caught carrying concealed in a location with valid 30.06 signage, then you could be subject to a fine of up to $200. I am not sure of the effect on your LTC, however. You could always get a Kel-Tec sub 2000 and keep it in your tool bag if you are worried about the Class C misdemeanor and still want to be armed. Since that is a rifle, it is not subject to the 30.06 restrictions, but it is still pretty easy to conceal in a decent sized bag.

geoelectro wrote:I repair organs and digital keyboards and as such I go to a significant number of Churches. Since the OC law has been enacted, a large number of these Churches are posting both 30.06 and 30.07 signs at their entrances. So I have pretty much stopped carrying. I have had several discussions with church personnel and the guards. It seems in several cases, they had people open carrying in their church and decided to put up the signs. In most cases though, it was done to stop OC but either due to misinformation or even a push from the sign company, they got both.

I have offered that the signs only stop the good guys etc. etc. etc. but it seems they are where they are with no incentive to change. They allow members to carry and larger churches have guards or even police protection. An armed guard even told me to just carry on as long as it's concealed! Then yesterday I see a comment on FB concerning the Orlando shooting where people are saying if they had laws like in Texas and people had been armed, fewer people would have died. I mentioned that carrying past a 51% sign in Texas is not allowed. A response was that it's only a class C misdemeanor, indicating it's not that bad to do it.

I'm a little confused here, I was always under the impression carrying past any sign that legally prevented carrying was very bad and could lead to losing your license. Thoughts?

Geo

In this case the punishment for breaking the law is not relevant. Carrying past a properly posted sign is against the law and suggesting that people break the law is against forum rules.

It's actually a class A misdemeanor to carry in a 30.06 posted Church. That's because you could be charged under 46.035 in addition to 30.06. And carry in a properly posted 51% location is a felony. So somebody is giving out bad info...

WildBill wrote:

geoelectro wrote:I repair organs and digital keyboards and as such I go to a significant number of Churches. Since the OC law has been enacted, a large number of these Churches are posting both 30.06 and 30.07 signs at their entrances. So I have pretty much stopped carrying. I have had several discussions with church personnel and the guards. It seems in several cases, they had people open carrying in their church and decided to put up the signs. In most cases though, it was done to stop OC but either due to misinformation or even a push from the sign company, they got both.

I have offered that the signs only stop the good guys etc. etc. etc. but it seems they are where they are with no incentive to change. They allow members to carry and larger churches have guards or even police protection. An armed guard even told me to just carry on as long as it's concealed! Then yesterday I see a comment on FB concerning the Orlando shooting where people are saying if they had laws like in Texas and people had been armed, fewer people would have died. I mentioned that carrying past a 51% sign in Texas is not allowed. A response was that it's only a class C misdemeanor, indicating it's not that bad to do it.

I'm a little confused here, I was always under the impression carrying past any sign that legally prevented carrying was very bad and could lead to losing your license. Thoughts?

Geo

In this case the punishment for breaking the law is not relevant. Carrying past a properly posted sign is against the law and suggesting that people break the law is against forum rules.

So are we going to sic the mods on the people telling us to turn right on red from the outside lanes?

WildBill wrote:

geoelectro wrote:I repair organs and digital keyboards and as such I go to a significant number of Churches. Since the OC law has been enacted, a large number of these Churches are posting both 30.06 and 30.07 signs at their entrances. So I have pretty much stopped carrying. I have had several discussions with church personnel and the guards. It seems in several cases, they had people open carrying in their church and decided to put up the signs. In most cases though, it was done to stop OC but either due to misinformation or even a push from the sign company, they got both.

I have offered that the signs only stop the good guys etc. etc. etc. but it seems they are where they are with no incentive to change. They allow members to carry and larger churches have guards or even police protection. An armed guard even told me to just carry on as long as it's concealed! Then yesterday I see a comment on FB concerning the Orlando shooting where people are saying if they had laws like in Texas and people had been armed, fewer people would have died. I mentioned that carrying past a 51% sign in Texas is not allowed. A response was that it's only a class C misdemeanor, indicating it's not that bad to do it.

I'm a little confused here, I was always under the impression carrying past any sign that legally prevented carrying was very bad and could lead to losing your license. Thoughts?

Geo

In this case the punishment for breaking the law is not relevant. Carrying past a properly posted sign is against the law and suggesting that people break the law is against forum rules.

The OP is talking about someone who posted on Facebook, not on this site. The exact response he reported also just said (incorrectly) that the penalty was not too severe for that particular crime. Advising someone about the penalty for an offense is not the same as recommending that they commit a crime, although it would be nice if the info being given out was actually correct.

To the OP, yes, definitely report that $10 you won at poker on your income taxes, stay at or just slightly below the speed limit at all times, stop behind the line at all red lights and stop signs, and whatever you do, never tear a tag off your mattress!!

ScottDLS wrote:

WildBill wrote:

geoelectro wrote:I repair organs and digital keyboards and as such I go to a significant number of Churches. Since the OC law has been enacted, a large number of these Churches are posting both 30.06 and 30.07 signs at their entrances. So I have pretty much stopped carrying. I have had several discussions with church personnel and the guards. It seems in several cases, they had people open carrying in their church and decided to put up the signs. In most cases though, it was done to stop OC but either due to misinformation or even a push from the sign company, they got both.

I have offered that the signs only stop the good guys etc. etc. etc. but it seems they are where they are with no incentive to change. They allow members to carry and larger churches have guards or even police protection. An armed guard even told me to just carry on as long as it's concealed! Then yesterday I see a comment on FB concerning the Orlando shooting where people are saying if they had laws like in Texas and people had been armed, fewer people would have died. I mentioned that carrying past a 51% sign in Texas is not allowed. A response was that it's only a class C misdemeanor, indicating it's not that bad to do it.

I'm a little confused here, I was always under the impression carrying past any sign that legally prevented carrying was very bad and could lead to losing your license. Thoughts?

Geo

In this case the punishment for breaking the law is not relevant. Carrying past a properly posted sign is against the law and suggesting that people break the law is against forum rules.

So are we going to sic the mods on the people telling us to turn right on red from the outside lanes?

I loved the jest but it does bring up a very real scenario that I don't think has been tested in trial yet; that is a LTC holder having to defend themselves in any area that has a proper 30.06 posting. Let's be honest, it's a class C in most cases and many people are going to pass right by those signs, however, you are still breaking the law as it is currently written. I can't think of the specific statute but I remember something about unlawful carry while engaging in criminal activity that isn't a class c traffic misdemeanor.

bear94 wrote:

ScottDLS wrote: So are we going to sic the mods on the people telling us to turn right on red from the outside lanes?

I loved the jest but it does bring up a very real scenario that I don't think has been tested in trial yet; that is a LTC holder having to defend themselves in any area that has a proper 30.06 posting. Let's be honest, it's a class C in most cases and many people are going to pass right by those signs, however, you are still breaking the law as it is currently written. I can't think of the specific statute but I remember something about unlawful carry while engaging in criminal activity that isn't a class c traffic misdemeanor.

Yes. It's been discussed before if you use deadly force while committing a non-traffic crime (even class C), you lose your automatic presumption of justification for deadly force. First, if I need to use my gun, that's the last thing I'm worrying about. Second, if the DA decides you weren't justified, you're going to get indicted, presumption or not. It's like if you're speeding 1 mile over and somebody jumps in front of you and you hit them, it's going to be a little harder to "beat the rap" for vehicular manslaughter IF you're charged with it.

So I don't advocate that anybody walk past a 30.06, or turn right on red from the outside lane...

Of course I don't walk past a 30.06 sign and as I said, I have stopped carrying because of all this new signage. I was just surprised at the response of the guard, and I don't believe much of anything on FB.

The sad fact is the OC movement has harmed, at least me, from being able to have the same freedom I had before this was enacted. I had it pretty easy with the only exception being schools where I occasionally do service work. Seems odd that making carrying a gun OK, concealed or open, has made it harder to carry concealed.

Thanks for the responses.

Geo

geoelectro wrote:Of course I don't walk past a 30.06 sign and as I said, I have stopped carrying because of all this new signage. I was just surprised at the response of the guard, and I don't believe much of anything on FB.

The sad fact is the OC movement has harmed, at least me, from being able to have the same freedom I had before this was enacted. I had it pretty easy with the only exception being schools where I occasionally do service work. Seems odd that making carrying a gun OK, concealed or open, has made it harder to carry concealed.

Thanks for the responses.

Geo

I wasn't suggesting that you, personally, would carry past a sign.
I also agree that is much information on FB that is wrong.
I don't know if I agree that a security guard telling you that you can carry past the sign voids the effective notice.
I don't believe it does, but I am not certain.
I think that lack of education/knowledge of the public and sign posters is the cause of the issue.
I think that time will remedy the situation to a certain extent.

WildBill wrote:I don't know if I agree that a security guard telling you that you can carry past the sign voids the effective notice.
I don't believe it does, but I am not certain.

I'm curious about your rationale here. Are you saying that a uniformed security guard does not have apparent authority to give effective notice? If so, then who would?

We have generally discussed effective notice going the other way, but I don't think the law has a double standard on this point. Of course, IANAL, and I could well be mistaken.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

WildBill wrote:I don't know if I agree that a security guard telling you that you can carry past the sign voids the effective notice.
I don't believe it does, but I am not certain.

I'm curious about your rationale here. Are you saying that a uniformed security guard does not have apparent authority to give effective notice? If so, then who would?

We have generally discussed effective notice going the other way, but I don't think the law has a double standard on this point. Of course, IANAL, and I could well be mistaken.

I am saying that a security guard would have authority to give effective notice.
I don't know that he can authorize a person to disregard a compliant posted 30.06 sign.

geoelectro wrote:Of course I don't walk past a 30.06 sign and as I said, I have stopped carrying because of all this new signage. I was just surprised at the response of the guard, and I don't believe much of anything on FB.

The sad fact is the OC movement has harmed, at least me, from being able to have the same freedom I had before this was enacted. I had it pretty easy with the only exception being schools where I occasionally do service work. Seems odd that making carrying a gun OK, concealed or open, has made it harder to carry concealed.

Thanks for the responses.

Geo

I think it is more the institution's response to the open carry law than the actual act of anyone carrying openly. The likelihood of it occurring in all these places where people are so worried about it is unlikely. We have no signs on our church at all...we're not worried about it....unless they're carrying a Glock....then we'll stop and pray for them.

WildBill wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

WildBill wrote:I don't know if I agree that a security guard telling you that you can carry past the sign voids the effective notice.
I don't believe it does, but I am not certain.

I'm curious about your rationale here. Are you saying that a uniformed security guard does not have apparent authority to give effective notice? If so, then who would?

We have generally discussed effective notice going the other way, but I don't think the law has a double standard on this point. Of course, IANAL, and I could well be mistaken.

I am saying that a security guard would have authority to give effective notice.
I don't know that he can authorize a person to disregard a compliant posted 30.06 sign.

Effective notice by someone with apparent authority overrides signage. I believe that this works either way. So the only real question is whether a uniformed security guard has apparent authority. Can you point to something in the statutes that defines a different level of authority needed if there is a compliant sign at the location?

And to your last point, the security guard wouldn't be authorizing a person to "disregard a compliant posted 30.06 sign" any more than a Whataburger employee is authorizing me to "disregard my RKBA" when he gives me effective notice that they don't allow OC. His effective notice trumps any signage, or lack thereof.

a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a concealed handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and (2) received notice that entry on the property by a license holder with a

It seems like anyone who could withhold consent by acting with "apparent authority" of the owner could also grant it. Turn it around...If there was no sign, could the security guard still give you oral notice that carry was prohibited? Yes. So it seems clear that he could grant it.


ETA: But I wouldn't want to be....dah...dah...dahh... The TEST CASE...