Do You Think A 30.06 Sign Welcomes OC?

[Abraham]

I don't, but some on this board apparently do.

And yes, I understand some just like to be contrarians, as do I at times...

What say you?

Would you walk past a properly posted, up to date 30.06 sign OCing, because if the business didn't post a 30.07 sign it's a perfectly legal thing to do. Though, I would doubt 1 in 1000 businesses who post 30.06 would welcome your OC gun, but hey, who knows until they do it?

(My guess is only someone looking to stir the pot would OC in a 30.06 business)

[steveincowtown]

No, but I think OC'ing past a 30.06 welcomes a 30.07 sign to be posted.

Abraham, keep in mind there are people amongst us that think you should tell folks when their 30.06 signs are post incorrectly.

[Jusme]

I wouldn't because, they have made their intentions known to me. I can take my business elsewhere. To me it falls under the category of just because you could, doesn't mean you should. While there would probably be no legal ramifications, (unless you refused to leave when asked) I agree that it smacks of stirring a pot that needs to be left alone. JMHO

[Middle Age Russ]

While I understand the legal requirements for effective notice for both concealed and open carry, my personal presumption is that very few business owners uncomfortable with concealed carry are likely to be comfortable with open carry. I would absolutely expect to be challenged and given verbal (effective) notice upon entering with an openly carried handgun -- and I'd be shocked if that did not happen.

[The Annoyed Man]

I say it is idiotic, and does nothing to further the cause. Nobody who is sentient thinks that OC'ing into a 30.06 posted business is going to be positively received and cause the owner to take down the sign. Therefore, they only do it to poke a stick into the business owner's eye. But it will be the only poke they get, because by the next day, the 30.07 sign will be up. Now, ask yourself...... How likely is it that some business owner who has had some idiot poke a stick in his eye, will become open to a logical, non-emotionally driven discussion about maybe taking his signs down and convert to being a gun rights supporter? It comes under the "don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining" heading.

Here's the negative fallout...... Business owners share information. Pretty soon, if not already, some of the information being shared will be that a business owner MUST put both signs up "if they want to prevent mass shootings", or some other giant dollop of misinformation.

When you act ignorant, you spread ignorance. Act enlightened, and you'll spread enlightenment. If you MUST have the last word, let it be one that leaves a favorable impression with the other person. OC'ing into a 30.06 posted establishment doesn't give you the last word. The owner gets the last word when he puts up the 30.07 sign in response.

MORE potential negative fallout...... Enough people OC into posted establishments, and eventually there's a huge push from the business community to get the legislature to combine both '06 and '07 under one signage requirement. When that happens, any business owner who seeks to exclude open carriers will also automatically exclude concealed carriers, WHICH IS THE REASON IT WAS A VICTORY TO GET 30.07 PASSED!!!!!

I'm sorry if this offends you're the guy who would OC into a 30.06 establishment, then you're an idiot. You HARM the cause, not help it. You're no different from these guys:

[Soccerdad1995]

Abraham,

I sure hope you are not referring to me in your "some people on this board" comment. In the other thread that we were both actively participating in the last couple days, I never made any comment along the lines of your hypothetical here. In fact, I clearly noted that it was unlikely for someone posting a 30.06 to also be OK with OC. Possible, yes. But unlikely. And definitely not "welcoming" of OC.

I'm also curious to see any posts on this site where anyone states that a 30.06 sign means the owner WELCOMES OC. There definitely were zero posts saying this in the thread that I referenced above. I think you may be setting up a bit of a red herring here, and as you phrased it in this post, you will likely find that almost everyone on this board is in complete and total agreement.

[LucasMcCain]

Now, ask yourself...... How likely is it that some business owner who has had some idiot poke a stick in his eye, will become open to a logical, non-emotionally driven discussion about maybe taking his signs down and convert to being a gun rights supporter?

This is the main reason I would not do it. If it's a business I care about patronizing, I'm going to disarm and go inside and talk to the owner or manager and try to let them know my side of the argument. When we're talking about private property, the property owner gets the final say. We can't make them allow us to carry or bully them into it. Calm, rational discourse is the only recourse we have, and it's the only one that would be effective anyway.

[ScottDLS]

If the "business" was on government owned property, and not otherwise prohibited, I might...just to make the point. More likely I would CC.

That is ultimately what it's going to take to get local governments and their business cronies to follow the law. I really don't care a whit whether Jerry Jones wants me carrying at a non-professional, non-scholastic event in Cowboys Stadium, but so far he has prevailed...

[Soccerdad1995]

Now, ask yourself...... How likely is it that some business owner who has had some idiot poke a stick in his eye, will become open to a logical, non-emotionally driven discussion about maybe taking his signs down and convert to being a gun rights supporter?

This is the main reason I would not do it. If it's a business I care about patronizing, I'm going to disarm and go inside and talk to the owner or manager and try to let them know my side of the argument. When we're talking about private property, the property owner gets the final say. We can't make them allow us to carry or bully them into it. Calm, rational discourse is the only recourse we have, and it's the only one that would be effective anyway.

with the exception that I wouldn't disarm. I would just be armed with something other than a handgun. I would simply walk in with my computer bag on my shoulder and have a rational discussion if at all possible. I would at a minimum hand him/her one of my "no guns, no money" cards.

When I disagree with someone I try to resist the urge to call them names, misstate their position, or do anything else that might feel good, but won't be effective. Rather, I try to understand where they are coming from, in this case why they feel the need to ban something that no one can even see. I then think about the specific words and actions that are most likely to shift their position closer to where I would like them to be. It doesn't always work (just ask my wife), but it's really the only approach that even has a chance to work.

[mojo84]

I don't think it welcomes open carry. However, I think the legislature established the two separate signs for a reason. If people don't want open or concealed carry they can make their wishes known by putting up both signs or being prepared to give notification as needed.

Many people are realizing open carry isn't that common so they have decided to just address open carry if needed without posting a sign. This is what I encouraged my church to do but they instead opted to order around 20 30.07 signs.

I don't believe calling the cops, like you indicated you would do in the other thread, before giving proper notice is the best method of dealing with the situation.

Personally, I do not open carry and have no problem with a business not allowing open carry. Therefore, I have no inteterest in pushing the issue or making a point.

[oljames3]

When I disagree with someone I try to resist the urge to call them names, misstate their position, or do anything else that might feel good, but won't be effective.

There has been too much name calling in this thread already. The original post is a straw man argument and not worthy of response.

[JustSomeOldGuy]

I'll let my esteemed colleague handle this question;

[RoyGBiv]

Shoulda made this a poll.

[apostate]

I think we can all agree that a business posting 30.06 and 30.07 signs doesn't want customers who are licensed to carry, and we may not carry our handguns there.

I think we can all agree there are many reasons a business doesn't post either sign. Perhaps they welcome licensed carry. Perhaps they're ambivalent. Whatever the reason, I think we can all agree we are legally allowed to carry there, openly or concealed, unless we receive other notice or it's off limits by statute and doesn't require those signs.

What if there is only one of those signs? I hope we all agree that mode of carry is prohibited, and the other mode is not prohibited by law. (Subject to the caveats above.) Unless we ask, we don't know why the business posted only one of the two signs. We may make assumptions, but legally we have only received notice regarding one mode. Whether we choose to go elsewhere, disarm before entering, carry in the non-prohibited mode, are personal choices. We each have the right to determine how we act in compliance with the law.

Finally, I really hope we all agree that neither 30.06 nor 30.07 signs have any bearing on legally carrying long guns.

[sixer-sxt-3.7]

Sometimes my only thrill is being a contrarian.

I'm sure there are businesses that may rather see OC over CC, so post accordingly. Without a door-to-door survey; however, this is pure conjecture. I've read this sentiment in the public, so it's not unreasonable to apply it to private businesses.

That said, unless you know the owner and his/her/their stance on OC when showing 30.06 signage, it could backfire. Hopefully, they'll give you verbal notice and give you a chance to correct it before bringing Johnny Law in.