Could you legally pass your own 30.06 sign?

[Hoi Polloi]

Random question that came up tonight. I'm not asking if anything would be done about it. I'm purely asking about legal theory 'cuz we're geeks like that.

So if you posted a valid 30.06 sign on property you controlled (your business, your home, etc) is there any legal means of validly carrying concealed past your own sign? Is there a way to give notice of exemption? The statutes allow verbal notice to exclude concealed carry but do they allow you to include yourself or other exemptions?

Would you have to say it aloud to yourself as you walked in the door? OK, that last one was a joke.

[jester]

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent;
and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.

[longtooth]

Jester is correct. Texas Personal Property rights are well recognized.

Besides that you cannot tresspass on your own property.

[C-dub]

I put the sign up and I own the property, but now my spouse has a restraining order against me.
Would I even still have my CHL or would it have been revoked at this point?


Actually, does one even need a 30.06 sign if someone is trespassing? Doesn't carrying a firearm during the commission of a crime already elevate the crime to a felony?

[longtooth]

Suspended but not revoked.
When the restraining order is recended the CHL will be reinstated if there are no other issues.

[Shu]

I was going to ask this same question today wow.

[Crossfire]

Why would you want to ban carry by all license holders except yourself? What kind of message does that send?

[Oldgringo]

Why would you want to ban carry by all license holders except yourself? What kind of message does that send?

"...do as I say, not do as I do..."

We receive (and send) that message all the time, alas. IOW, "what is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander".

Y'all have a nice day, ya hear?

[Hoi Polloi]

We don't want to! lol

We were talking about a couple we know wondering if the wife put one up if the husband could carry past it.

We don't think it will actually happen. We were just laughing about it and wondered what the legalities would be.

[psijac]

I've always found it fascinating that you can use lethal force to stop someone from taking a life but you cannot use lethal force to stop some one from taking their own life.

[Oldgringo]

I've always found it fascinating that you can use lethal force to stop someone from taking a life but you cannot use lethal force to stop some one from taking their own life.

Seriously? Think about it a little longer and it may come to you.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I've always found it fascinating that you can use lethal force to stop someone from taking a life but you cannot use lethal force to stop some one from taking their own life.

Seriously? Think about it a little longer and it may come to you.

I agree with psijac. Remember the definition of deadly force includes "serious bodily injury" that would include a gunshot to an extremity, or using a club or other impact weapon to knock an gun or knife from someone's hand. I believe those acts should be lawful to prevent a suicide, but they are prohibited by TPC §9.34(a).

However, TPC §9.34(b) makes it lawful to use deadly force to preserve life in an emergency. For example, if you are trapped in a burning car, I can cut off your arm (seriously bodily injury = "deadly force") to get you out of the car and save your life.

Whether by suicide or accident, dead is dead and I think the law should allow the use of what is technically "deadly force" to prevent a suicide.

Chas.

Sec. 9.34. PROTECTION OF LIFE OR HEALTH. (a) A person is justified in using force, but not deadly force, against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the other from committing suicide or inflicting serious bodily injury to himself.

(b) A person is justified in using both force and deadly force against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force or deadly force is immediately necessary to preserve the other's life in an emergency.

[C-dub]

We don't want to! lol

We were talking about a couple we know wondering if the wife put one up if the husband could carry past it.

We don't think it will actually happen. We were just laughing about it and wondered what the legalities would be.

Wouldn't the husband also have right to remove the sign?

[bdickens]

I've always found it fascinating that you can use lethal force to stop someone from taking a life but you cannot use lethal force to stop some one from taking their own life.

Not true.

[Mhoward]

Thats funny. When hurricane Ike came through I found a 30.06 sign in front of my house. It had to travel a long way since I have never seen it on any building in my area. It is now posted on my back porch above the bar