TexasCHLforum.com

APynckel wrote: There's no grey area when it specifically states the way you have to post the sign.

Personally, I consider it grey until there is case law. Sure a 3/4" text isn't valid, but I'm not betting on it until I see courts rule that way.
I agree, the law is pretty explicit here, but if you think that a LEO is going to bust out a ruler and let you go, I'd be very surprised.

I'm with you there. I can see being arrested and then having to deal with court to figure it out. I would prefer to avoid being arrested and hiring a lawyer, so I play it safe. However, I don't want to have to lock up my handgun more and more if these signs and questions spread. What a mess.

bbobb wrote:Seeing how specific that law is,

There's no specificity as to whether each entrance must be posted either; which leads to much discussion (and consternation) as to what proper notice is when each and every entrance is not posted. "I think if they meant the sign has to be ALL CAPS then that section of the law would have give the example in ALL CAPS." That argument fails with me. It's only my opinion as to what they really mean, but I firmly believe they refer to the common and most used definition for block letters in the law, which is uppercase/capitals.

I site the most used and common definition for the term "block letters". Oxford Dictionary: "plain capital letters", Free Dictionary *(1): "A plain capital letter written or printed unjoined to a following or preceding letter." Webster's:"an often hand-drawn simple capital letter composed of strokes of uniform thickness", MacMillan:" letters of the alphabet written in their large form, for example, 'A' rather than 'a'. Block letters are often called capitals."

And from personal experience anytime I painted a sign requesting block letters it was all capital.
Regardless I wouldn't enter an establishment with all upper case or all lower case or mixed if the letters were even close to being legal size. I do admit I have ignored signage that's obviously too small, i.e. I've seen 8.5x11 inch signs. I'm not willing to be a test case and wouldn't argue with anyone who said CHL's should err on the side of caution re: 30.06.

*(1) Free Dictionary has a second definition related only to Printing but doesn't ascribe letter case.
a. A sans-serif style of type.
b. A letter printed or written sans serif.

I think you guys who are confident that a 30.06 sign is not enforceable because of .75 inch letters should carry right past them. Eventually one of you will become the test case and then the rest of us will know what the court says about what is and isn't enforceable.

jmra wrote:I think you guys who are confident that a 30.06 sign is not enforceable because of .75 inch letters should carry right past them. Eventually one of you will become the test case and then the rest of us will know what the court says about what is and isn't enforceable.

I think all the reply posts have expressed reluctance to carry past signs that may not technically meet the legal requirement. I stated I wouldn't. I can't gauge whether the OP would or would not, but since his workplace forbids firearms it's a moot point for his him. I don't think there are a lot of members here with the proclivity to test the exactness required to prohibit CHL CC and a judges interpretation, much less the time and money to do it. But..... if any one wants to be the test case I guess they can contact the OP for the location In seriousness I just wish legislators had the ability to think and write legislation that was clearer. But I guess their buddies the judges would have less to do.

bbobb wrote:Seeing how specific that law is, I think if they meant the sign has to be ALL CAPS then that section of the law would have give the example in ALL CAPS.

As MasterofNone stated the correct term is Uppercase, not capital letters.

IANAL, but I believe that all laws and legal documents are required to be printed with a certain typeface. This would not include a "block letter" typeface.
I don't know how much has changed since the computer age, but it used to be that all legal briefs had to be a certain typewriter font, 12 cpi Elite Prestige as I recall.
Probably one of the lawyers on the forum can tell us if this is still the case.

cb1000rider wrote:Personally, I consider it grey until there is case law.

I see your point and you should also be careful relying on 46.035(i) without case law.

jmra wrote:I think you guys who are confident that a 30.06 sign is not enforceable because of .75 inch letters should carry right past them. Eventually one of you will become the test case and then the rest of us will know what the court says about what is and isn't enforceable.

As a non-lawyer let me give you my view. Attorneys are welcome to give their learned opinions.

I don't think it's that simple. Case law only becomes case law when an appellate court publishes an opinion.

So, just because you get arrested and are found guilty or are acquitted doesn't make it a "test case" per se.

You may get arrested for carrying past a 3/4 inch sign and the DA refuses to press charges, but that doesn't mean that you or another CHL won't get arrested in another jurisdiction or at another time.

You may go to trial and get found guilty, but unless you appeal and win and the court vacates the conviction based on the size of the letters, it still leaves the discretion for arrest and filing charges up to the LEO and DA.

Besides the time, money and aggravation of the CHL who is arrested, they will have to surrender their license for the duration. That really would suck.

WildBill wrote:

jmra wrote:I think you guys who are confident that a 30.06 sign is not enforceable because of .75 inch letters should carry right past them. Eventually one of you will become the test case and then the rest of us will know what the court says about what is and isn't enforceable.

As a non-lawyer let me give you my view. Attorneys are welcome to give their learned opinions.

I don't think it's that simple. Case law only becomes case law when an appellate court publishes an opinion.

So, just because you get arrested and are found guilty or are acquitted doesn't make it a "test case" per se.

You may get arrested for carrying past a 3/4 inch sign and the DA refuses to press charges, but that doesn't mean that you or another CHL won't get arrested in another jurisdiction or at another time.

You may go to trial and get found guilty, but unless you appeal and win and the court vacates the conviction based on the size of the letters, it still leaves the discretion for arrest and filing charges up to the LEO and DA.

Besides the time, money and aggravation of the CHL who is arrested, they will have to surrender their license for the duration. That really would suck.

I just thought of another option.

Maybe we can get some one to request an opinion from our Texas AG on the subject of 30.06 signs.

That would probably put a lot of our questions to rest.

Who Can Request an Attorney General Opinion?
Sections 402.042 and 402.043 of the Government Code list the officials who are authorized to request formal attorney general opinions on questions of law.
The attorney general is prohibited by statute from giving a written opinion to anyone other than an authorized requestor. Authorized requestors are:

the governor
the head of a department of state government
the head or board of a penal institution
the head or board of an eleemosynary institution
the head of a state board
a regent or trustee of a state educational institution
a committee of a house of the Texas Legislature
a county auditor authorized by law
the chairman of the governing board of a river authority
a district or county attorney

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opin/#whocan" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For me, walking past a non-compliant 30.06 is a bit like crashing a party where I was not invited.

I could probably get in, but I wouldn't want to go to a place where I am not welcome.

WildBill wrote:For me, walking past a non-compliant 30.06 is a bit like crashing a party where I was not invited.

I could probably get in, but I wouldn't want to go to a place where I am not welcome.

Same here. I find it odd that people who won't visit a place with a gun buster sign want to argue about the legality of a 30.06 that is just a little "off".

WildBill wrote:I just thought of another option.

Maybe we can get some one to request an opinion from our Texas AG on the subject of 30.06 signs.

That would probably put a lot of our questions to rest.

I thought about doing just that at the last TSRA event in Mesquite last year and ran out of time before the banquet started. While there are procedures for a "formal request" he seemed pretty approachable and I suspect he would offer a verbal opinion if asked.

Will he be at the next TSRA event in Austin next month? I couldn't find any info on the TSRA website.

Larry

I'm curious. Was there a picture of the sign posted?

Maxwell wrote:I'm curious. Was there a picture of the sign posted?

Yes I removed it. Sorry.