Another 30.06 posting thread...

[sjfcontrol]

I'm going to side with caution on this one and keep my CC at home when I do have to go there unless I can talk my g/f into talking her boss into taking it down or at least giving me oral or written permission to CC while there. I don't think that the boss/owner has a problem with CHLs since both he and his son are avid hunters however I am aware of prior incidents of disgruntled clients coming in with firearms.

OR -- Just have your GF remove/destroy the sign!

(Just a joke -- probably not a very good idea!)

[Kythas]

I would say it's not valid on two points:

1. It's not posted in a location conspicuous to the public;
2. The wording is not correct.

Of course, I am not a lawyer nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[C-dub]

OR -- Just have your GF remove/destroy the sign!
(Just a joke -- probably not a very good idea!)

I had considered the same advice, but you just never know where there might be cameras.

Through all of the discussion about who this incorrect sign applied to it was pointed out that it must be in a conspicuous place clearly visible to the public. However, since the "public" cannot see this incorrect sign would it even apply to anyone? Even the employees? It might be expensive, but I don't think it would even legally apply to the employees for both of those reasons.


edit: Oops. My typing was not as fast as Kythas'.

[OldSchool]

If in some situations "Concealed means Concealed" means I can violate the law because my weapon is concealed and no one will ever know and it is OK because I am a really good person so that little technicality shouldn't apply to me...then I STRONGLY disagree with the phrase.

The truth of our character is demonstrated by our conduct when no one is watching. To know what the right thing to do is does not display character, however doing the right thing will.

CWood, I agree completely. You said it well.

[WildBill]

If in some situations "Concealed means Concealed" means I can violate the law because my weapon is concealed and no one will ever know and it is OK because I am a really good person so that little technicality shouldn't apply to me...then I STRONGLY disagree with the phrase.

The truth of our character is demonstrated by our conduct when no one is watching. To know what the right thing to do is does not display character, however doing the right thing will.

CWood, I agree completely. You said it well.

Well said. e.g. If I don't get caught, then it's not wrong.

[megs]

If in some situations "Concealed means Concealed" means I can violate the law because my weapon is concealed and no one will ever know and it is OK because I am a really good person so that little technicality shouldn't apply to me...then I STRONGLY disagree with the phrase.

The truth of our character is demonstrated by our conduct when no one is watching. To know what the right thing to do is does not display character, however doing the right thing will.

CWood, I agree completely. You said it well.

Cops who say they will arrest people when the sign isn't valid show their true character. They should be behind bars instead of behind a badge.

If for someone "Concealed means Concealed" means they will legally carry knowing that concealment protects them from being hassled by the ignorant and the evil, then I STRONGLY agree with the phrase.

[jmra]

Reply to cwood;

I would like to clarify some of the statements I made. It was my understanding that the question was related to what is legal and what is not legal. A sign posted in an employee break room with four walls and a door could not possibly meet even the intent of the law much less the actual requirements of the law for the general public and therefore can not apply to the general public outside the break room. I do believe that the law would apply in the break room to whoever entered the break room, this is why I stated, after becoming aware of the sign in the break room, I would not enter the break room armed. I understand that the wording is wrong, however, if the sign was posted at the entrance or in plain view upon entering the building (even with incorrect wording/sizing) I would leave immediately.

On the issue of a mall posting a single sign at one entrance - I never suggested that I would (or anyone should) simply find another entrance to the mall area and claim that they had not been notified. What I stated (or at least tried to convey) is that if individual stores had other entrances and those stores were not posted (either at the entrance or within the store itself) then there is no reason/legal obligation to believe that the sign in the common mall area applies to each individual store.

On the issue of only needing to be notified once, are you suggesting that if on Monday the main entrance is posted (I have been notified along with thousands of others) and I return on Tuesday and find that the sign has been removed that I can not carry in the mall because I was notified on Monday? This would mean that even though the mall was no longer posted that thousands of visitors to the mall would never be able to carry in the mall because they had already been notified once. That is not even logical. I would agree however that if you were given oral notice by someone in authority that you should not carry until you have been given permission to do so by the same person or one in a position of higher authority.

My SOP is very simple. If it is obvious that someone has at least made an attempt to comply with 30.06 (even if they did not get it exactly right) I turn around and head the other direction (leave immediately). However, this is what I choose to do, not what I am legally bound to do. It all comes down to how much risk you are comfortable with. Most leo's are clueless as to the law related to CHL and the likely hood of being arrested in a posted area is probably not any higher than being arrested somewhere that you have every right to carry such as a church or an amusement park. That is why I asked the question about how many cases have been filed where a CHL has been charged with this type of violation. I would still be interested in that answer.

When I said "I respectfully disagree", I truly meant the "respectfully" part. I have no doubt that you are an excellent instructor. The problem is I know several excellent instructors and it does not seem that you can get those guys to agree on any of the grey areas. I remember reading a post recently where a guy attended a CHL class where two instructors lead the class. There were a number of areas where the two instructors disagreed in their interpretation of the law and the students were given opposing views. We can talk all day about what could happen if this happened and what could happen if that happened but the fact of the matter is that no one knows until it actually happens. I agree that we should all abide by the law. The problem is the law leaves a lot open to interpretation and even the experts on this forum differ in their interpretations. Who are we to believe?

When dealing with the grey areas for me it comes down to this - 99% of the time I can completely avoid situations that place me in the grey zone. But, for the 1% that I can not avoid the grey area I am going to do what it takes to protect myself and my family.

That being said, respectfully, I don't consider the area outside the "break room" or an individual store at a mall with its own entrance (without a 30.06 sign in the store) a grey area.

To the OP,

I would have a hard time leaving my weapon in the car if the area was that bad - not only out of concern that someone might steal the weapon but for what might happen to me between the car and the building. In fact if the area is that bad, I might have a great deal of concern about my gf working there at all. Best wishes to you and hope you can get the sign taken down.

jmra out.

[TxSigp229]

Here is a better picture of the sign posted in the staff break room





The business in question is a law firm. My g/f has been a lawyer with them for over 20 years. Neither of us wish to break any laws. However, she advises me to just ignore the sign

Next time I run into her boss, I'll just ask him for oral or written permission to CC there. The worst thing he can do is say "no".

[7075-T7]

Here is a better picture of the sign posted in the staff break room





The business in question is a law firm. My g/f has been a lawyer with them for over 20 years. Neither of us wish to break any laws. However, she advises me to just ignore the sign

Next time I run into her boss, I'll just ask him for oral or written permission to CC there. The worst thing he can do is say "no".

ummm... That sign isn't legal anyway. It's not the correct 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."

[PUCKER]

Hey, is there an echo in here??

I wouldn't ask - because if he says "no" then you've been given notice. Currently the sign is invalid, it's the OLD language, not correct anymore.

[WildBill]

Hey, is there an echo in here??

I wouldn't ask - because if he says "no" then you've been given notice.

Let sleeping dogs lie.

[C-dub]

Reply to cwood;

I would like to clarify some of the statements I made. It was my understanding that the question was related to what is legal and what is not legal. A sign posted in an employee break room with four walls and a door could not possibly meet even the intent of the law much less the actual requirements of the law for the general public and therefore can not apply to the general public outside the break room. I do believe that the law would apply in the break room to whoever entered the break room, this is why I stated, after becoming aware of the sign in the break room, I would not enter the break room armed. I understand that the wording is wrong, however, if the sign was posted at the entrance or in plain view upon entering the building (even with incorrect wording/sizing) I would leave immediately.

JMRA, I don't disagree with your choice to err on the side of caution. I usually do the same, but if I were in your shoes in this case I would continue to CC. On the legal side, though, it is like Kythas and I pointed out earlier. A sign must be in a conspicuous place visible to the "public." Otherwise, the sign has no legal weight. A sign in a room that only certain people have access to is an invalid sign altogether. There's nothing in the law that says a sign placed like this applies to those that have access to it.

Add to this the fact that the wording is incorrect and you have the distinct possibility that whoever placed it there did so to appease some ignorant liberal gun fearing soul. If you do ask for permission you might even find that out.

[marksiwel]

Theres some shady businesses out there where the have people go to Office buildings, Restaurants ect and sell them signs that they convince people they NEED.
I went to an interview for one of them in Dallas way back when, its a bull job

[TxSigp229]

Thanks to everyone for their replies and opinions.

I guess this is a moot point. Though there is a sign (in the staff break room ) and not one at the entrances. I just found out, from my gf, that the boss doesn't want employees or clients CCing in the business. However, it turns out that the boss keeps a gun in his office

[RPB]

Looks pretty simple ...
If you are licensed under Art. 4413(29ee), TEXAS CIVIL STATUTES , then don't carry in there, the sign prohibits it !!!
I personally was licensed under CHAPTER 411, GOVERNMENT CODE, so I'm ok.
However, you were given verbal notice now so ...