Improper sign on outside of medical facility

[Embalmo]

For the life of me, I can not comprehend the inner compulsion of some CH licensees and/or CH applicants to point out and debate legally defective "no-guns-allowed" signage.

Be comfortable in our superior knowledge and "let sleeping dogs lie". The sign is either legal or it is not. It does not require our input with facility employess/management.

My theory is that they are not "comfortable with their knowledge" and they have a need to feel superior by pointing out non-compliant signs to facility employees/management.

Sometimes knowledge is power, but only if you keep it to yourself.

Well said!

[PappaGun]

Ignore.

Hospital near me has a "No Weapons" sign on its door. And I ain't tellin!

Yep.

And so does my credit union and a whole lot of other places that I have
lots of good conversation with the very nice employees.

But now that I think about it,
I NEVER had a conversation about that darn sign!

[jimlongley]

I can tell you it is not sarcasm. I don't really want to answer for Jim, but I believe I know where he is coming from. Bottom line, the company putting up th sign believes that have provided proper notice, and if you are found carrying, they will be calling the police. You may be in a jurisdiction that the PD believes that a sign posted (valid or not) is proper and they will arrest you (aka Grapevine PD and Grapevine Mills Mall.) In the end, you may beat the rap, but will still take the ride, and probably need your lawyer riding shotgun (pun intended )

Jim is just stating that the best way to handle it is to try and get them to remove the sign. If that doesn't work, then get them to post a legal sign so ALL CHL's know it is officially off limits, you are not wanted there, and there is no question that you can't carry there and will not run the risk of being arrested. The deal about going past signs that are at least an attempt at trying to provide notice is asking for nothing but a fight. I personally, like Jim, would rather see a valid sign and not do business with them than try to play the gray area and not know what the outcome will be.

Jim, if I misstated your intent, please correct it.

You pretty much covered it, Keith.

And when I notified Bass Pro Shops that their Grapevine store was improperly posted, as well and somewhat insulting to CHLs, they took the (non-compliant) signs down. I got a letter from them claiming that local management received a "sign package" and just put all the signs up.

I don't agree that store owners and managers are secretly communicating that CHL holders are welcome, I think they have no idea, none, zilch, and the best way to send such a signal, if they really knew or cared, would be for them to put up gun busters signs to let the unknowing public think they are safe.

[jimlongley]

For the life of me, I can not comprehend the inner compulsion of some CH licensees and/or CH applicants to point out and debate legally defective "no-guns-allowed" signage.

Be comfortable in our superior knowledge and "let sleeping dogs lie". The sign is either legal or it is not. It does not require our input with facility employess/management.

My theory is that they are not "comfortable with their knowledge" and they have a need to feel superior by pointing out non-compliant signs to facility employees/management.

Sometimes knowledge is power, but only if you keep it to yourself.

You're quoting the wrong person, Bill.

[jimlongley]

Ignore.

Hospital near me has a "No Weapons" sign on its door. And I ain't tellin!

Yep.

And so does my credit union and a whole lot of other places that I have
lots of good conversation with the very nice employees.

But now that I think about it,
I NEVER had a conversation about that darn sign!

A "gun busters" sign, or "No Weapons" sign, or the Buffalo Wild Wings "Corporate Policy . . ." are all equally meaningless and I don't worry about them or bother with letting the posters know that they are ineffective, the signs that worry me are the ones that come close to but do not actually comply, or even do not come close but have some of the right language. With DPS' attitude that they will enforce anything they consider to be an effort to post, I see possibilities that I don't like to consider.

When the sign is a simulation of the real thing, I let the owners know that they are non-compliant and that the law requires them to be this size and shape, if they change their sign to the big ugly one, so be it, they didn't want my business anyway, and if they take it down, it's done and over. I don't want to set myself up as a test case so I won't be going there anyway, and it doesn't bother me that they might repost just for that reason, I don't miss them or their product, and if I can influence enough others to follow me it might hurt them in the pocketbook.

[Embalmo]

You pretty much covered it, Keith.

And when I notified Bass Pro Shops that their Grapevine store was improperly posted, as well and somewhat insulting to CHLs, they took the (non-compliant) signs down. I got a letter from them claiming that local management received a "sign package" and just put all the signs up.

I don't agree that store owners and managers are secretly communicating that CHL holders are welcome, I think they have no idea, none, zilch, and the best way to send such a signal, if they really knew or cared, would be for them to put up gun busters signs to let the unknowing public think they are safe.[/quote]

So let me get this straight-Bass Pro Shops are now off limits to CHLers because of your actions? Please tell me if I'm wrong here.

Embalmo

[Embalmo]

A "gun busters" sign, or "No Weapons" sign, or the Buffalo Wild Wings "Corporate Policy . . ." are all equally meaningless and I don't worry about them or bother with letting the posters know that they are ineffective, the signs that worry me are the ones that come close to but do not actually comply, or even do not come close but have some of the right language. With DPS' attitude that they will enforce anything they consider to be an effort to post, I see possibilities that I don't like to consider.

When the sign is a simulation of the real thing, I let the owners know that they are non-compliant and that the law requires them to be this size and shape, if they change their sign to the big ugly one, so be it, they didn't want my business anyway, and if they take it down, it's done and over. I don't want to set myself up as a test case so I won't be going there anyway, and it doesn't bother me that they might repost just for that reason, I don't miss them or their product, and if I can influence enough others to follow me it might hurt them in the pocketbook.

So am I getting this right? Some non-compliant signs are totally fine with you, but you decide that other non-compliant signs are bothersome, so you go out of your way to make them compliant so that individuals with concealed handgun licenses can no longer legally carry at those establishments.

There is no sarcasm, or rude tone intended here, I just find your point of view very puzzling on this forum, if I understand you correctly.

Embalmo

[ScottDLS]

So let me get this straight-Bass Pro Shops are now off limits to CHLers because of your actions? Please tell me if I'm wrong here.

Embalmo

No, I think what Jim said is that after he e-mailed Bass Pro management, the (incorrect) signs came down, and none went up. I've been by that Bass Pro and I do remember the old signs and recently I haven't seen any. I think what Jim is saying is that he only tries to challenge signs that are close enough to a 30.06 posting that some police or prosecutors might make an issue of it if somehow you are discovered. I understand the sentiment, but like you I personally don't feel it's the best approach.

My goal is to follow the plain language of the law which in my opinion (worth what you paid for it); is quite clear as to what constitutes notice under 30.06. I've come to a method of carry that I am comfortable is very unlikely to be detected. I'm not worried about being a test case because I'm not going to get discovered. Contrary to popular internet wisdom, the Grapevine Police do not possess x-ray vision. I'm not going to waste my time educating some corporate bureaucrat on the intricacies of Texas trespass statutes.

I've also noticed in the last 2 or 3 years that a lot more hospitals and medical facilities in my area are posting correct 30.06 notices. I hope this isn't the result of some CHL crusader telling them that their Vernon's Civil Statutes 30.05 and big bad "we don't like them guns" signs are wrong. One exception to this is publicly owned and/or leased facilities that are not otherwise prohibited under 46.035. I DO think we need to challenge these in writing and with communications to our elected officials. And I might be willing to be the "test case" for one of these. Recent example would be State Fair of Texas.

-Scott

[jimlongley]

You pretty much covered it, Keith.

And when I notified Bass Pro Shops that their Grapevine store was improperly posted, as well and somewhat insulting to CHLs, they took the (non-compliant) signs down. I got a letter from them claiming that local management received a "sign package" and just put all the signs up.

I don't agree that store owners and managers are secretly communicating that CHL holders are welcome, I think they have no idea, none, zilch, and the best way to send such a signal, if they really knew or cared, would be for them to put up gun busters signs to let the unknowing public think they are safe.

So let me get this straight-Bass Pro Shops are now off limits to CHLers because of your actions? Please tell me if I'm wrong here.

Embalmo

You are wrong.

I think you need to go back and read that a little more carefully, without your paradigms in place. I wrote them a paper letter, they took their signs DOWN and they are not posted, and sent me a letter explaining that they had been put up in error.

[jimlongley]

A "gun busters" sign, or "No Weapons" sign, or the Buffalo Wild Wings "Corporate Policy . . ." are all equally meaningless and I don't worry about them or bother with letting the posters know that they are ineffective, the signs that worry me are the ones that come close to but do not actually comply, or even do not come close but have some of the right language. With DPS' attitude that they will enforce anything they consider to be an effort to post, I see possibilities that I don't like to consider.

When the sign is a simulation of the real thing, I let the owners know that they are non-compliant and that the law requires them to be this size and shape, if they change their sign to the big ugly one, so be it, they didn't want my business anyway, and if they take it down, it's done and over. I don't want to set myself up as a test case so I won't be going there anyway, and it doesn't bother me that they might repost just for that reason, I don't miss them or their product, and if I can influence enough others to follow me it might hurt them in the pocketbook.

So am I getting this right? Some non-compliant signs are totally fine with you, but you decide that other non-compliant signs are bothersome, so you go out of your way to make them compliant so that individuals with concealed handgun licenses can no longer legally carry at those establishments.

There is no sarcasm, or rude tone intended here, I just find your point of view very puzzling on this forum, if I understand you correctly.

Embalmo

Sounds sarcastic and rude from my point of view.

What we have been discussing is non-compliant 30.06 postings, such as that shown in the original post, not "no weapons" signage, gun busters signs are definitively NOT 30.06.

And why, if you know that they don't want you there, would you continue to support them with your money? Do you really think that you would get away with passing their non-compliant 30.06 posting if you are discovered?

My feeling, clearly stated numerous times, is that any business that goes so far as to post a 30.06 sign that is non-compliant is indicating that they intend to prosecute anyone caught carrying concealed under 30.06 on their premises to the fullest extent. I don't believe that ANY of them are sending secret signals to the "CHL brotherhood" that it is really ok to carry, that they don't mean it. I have talked to many, and written to others, and not one, none, zero, zilch, have answered that they just do it to make the unwashed masses feel safer. Bass Pro answered that local management put up the signs received in a package, and they were in error, and TOOK THEM DOWN!

I do, sometimes, write or call about gun bisters signs, and I am still waiting on a reply from Buffalo Wild Wings about their "Corporate Policy . . ." sign, which didn't exist some weeks ago (see my picture posted in a different thread) and does now, very near their blue TABC sign. A gun busters, or no weapons, sign is less likely to be enforced by police, but even then you could still get cuffed and stuffed if the wrong person detects your gun and calls the cops.

If you don't reeducate those ignorant enough to put them up by mistake, the signs will stay up and they WILL be a threat to be cuffed and stuffed. If you don't insist on those that are serious about posting doing it right, they will continue to do it wrong, and they WILL be a threat to be cuffed and stuffed.

If you just ignore those places that are improperly posted, for any reason or excuse, and do business with them, you are providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

Clear enough now?

[Embalmo]

You pretty much covered it, Keith.

And when I notified Bass Pro Shops that their Grapevine store was improperly posted, as well and somewhat insulting to CHLs, they took the (non-compliant) signs down. I got a letter from them claiming that local management received a "sign package" and just put all the signs up.

I don't agree that store owners and managers are secretly communicating that CHL holders are welcome, I think they have no idea, none, zilch, and the best way to send such a signal, if they really knew or cared, would be for them to put up gun busters signs to let the unknowing public think they are safe.

So let me get this straight-Bass Pro Shops are now off limits to CHLers because of your actions? Please tell me if I'm wrong here.

Embalmo

You are wrong.

I think you need to go back and read that a little more carefully, without your paradigms in place. I wrote them a paper letter, they took their signs DOWN and they are not posted, and sent me a letter explaining that they had been put up in error.

If that is the case, it could have gone either way and it seems for the moment we got lucky. My problem is that I like to go to some of the places that are improperly posted, and more importantly I like my wife to be able to protect herself at places that are improperly posted like my Dr.'s office and Buffalo Wild Wings. I can certainly see how annoying it is when places are improperly posted, but in the end we'll just have less places to legally carry, and I think that you don't want that.

Please don't start a debate thread about how you believe your ideas will increase the number of places to legally carry-Trust me, if you get the ball rolling, business will start communicating with each other and the DA's office and it'll be like there is no concealed handgun law. Let's all be on the same side here and keep concealed carry legal in as many places as we possibly can.

Embalmo

[jimlongley]

I've also noticed in the last 2 or 3 years that a lot more hospitals and medical facilities in my area are posting correct 30.06 notices. I hope this isn't the result of some CHL crusader telling them that their Vernon's Civil Statutes 30.05 and big bad "we don't like them guns" signs are wrong. One exception to this is publicly owned and/or leased facilities that are not otherwise prohibited under 46.035. I DO think we need to challenge these in writing and with communications to our elected officials. And I might be willing to be the "test case" for one of these. Recent example would be State Fair of Texas.

-Scott

What nobody here seems to realize, or at least nobody states, is that this is not a one sided issue, there are crusaders on the other side too, and they write and call. I talked to a paramedic in the Allen fire department a while back and he indicated he was trying to get our hospital properly posted because he felt that guns do not belong in hospitals, and he was not about to allow me to even attempt to change his mind, "Years as a paramedic, lots of 'gun victims'" and so on, when he sees a hospital that is not posted, or has the 30.05 or 46.xxx signs, he tries to get it fixed. I have wondered if he was the reason why 30.06 first appeared at the emergency entrance, and just exactly what would transpire if I was brought in unconscious and carrying, is it me who is responsible for passing the sign, or the paramedics that actually wheeled me through?

I don't associate with lots of people like that so I don't hear much of that side, but I have heard friends, who obviously don't know that both my wife and I have CHLs, go on and on about this horrible trend sweeping the land and that TX CHL laws should be repealed, etc, etc, etc.

I have also heard a co-worker opine that Home Depot should be posted 30.06 to protect us from the crazy people who carry guns. She hasn't spoken to me in months now, since I revealed that I am one of those crazy people. What blessed relief.

I, personally, think that we need to concentrate on legislative relief this next session. As much as I would like to see open carry so I don't have to worry about the next time the wind blows my jacket open, or I pull my wallet, or someone even just guesses correctly what that lump on my hip is, I think that our legislative climate is not ripe for it. What we can accomplish is correcting the perceived deficiencies in the 30.06 statute, making it a pure black or white issue; either you have the correct sign or you don't and if you don't it's not enforceable, and the correct sign is very large, in vibrant blue, with bright red letters that hurt your eyes. (Well leave the "hurt your eyes" part out, but you know what I mean." We have a whole thread about "Cuffed and Stuffed" plus lots of, anecdotal, evidence of confusion and abuses, that could serve as a backdrop of reasoning for making the changes.

[austin-tatious]

One of my doctor's offices has a clearly non-compliant 30.06 posting. The office serves about 8 doctors. At the conclusion of my latest visit, I asked him if he knew what 30.06 means, and he as expected answered "No, what's that?". After a brief explanation of the law and telling him there was one on the building and that I was a CHL and was not safe in his office because of the 30.06, I gave him one of the TSRA "No guns = No money" cards. He was receptive; he agreed it was a foolish sign that no crazy/criminal person would obey; he said he would ask the office manager about why it was up and could they get it removed. I NEVER said the sign was not compliant or even hinted at it. My goal is to get it removed but not replaced with a compliant sign.

Your thoughts, comment, and slings and arrows are welcome.

[Embalmo]

[quote="jimlongley
Sounds sarcastic and rude from my point of view.

What we have been discussing is non-compliant 30.06 postings, such as that shown in the original post, not "no weapons" signage, gun busters signs are definitively NOT 30.06.

And why, if you know that they don't want you there, would you continue to support them with your money? Do you really think that you would get away with passing their non-compliant 30.06 posting if you are discovered?

My feeling, clearly stated numerous times, is that any business that goes so far as to post a 30.06 sign that is non-compliant is indicating that they intend to prosecute anyone caught carrying concealed under 30.06 on their premises to the fullest extent. I don't believe that ANY of them are sending secret signals to the "CHL brotherhood" that it is really ok to carry, that they don't mean it. I have talked to many, and written to others, and not one, none, zero, zilch, have answered that they just do it to make the unwashed masses feel safer. Bass Pro answered that local management put up the signs received in a package, and they were in error, and TOOK THEM DOWN!

I do, sometimes, write or call about gun bisters signs, and I am still waiting on a reply from Buffalo Wild Wings about their "Corporate Policy . . ." sign, which didn't exist some weeks ago (see my picture posted in a different thread) and does now, very near their blue TABC sign. A gun busters, or no weapons, sign is less likely to be enforced by police, but even then you could still get cuffed and stuffed if the wrong person detects your gun and calls the cops.

If you don't reeducate those ignorant enough to put them up by mistake, the signs will stay up and they WILL be a threat to be cuffed and stuffed. If you don't insist on those that are serious about posting doing it right, they will continue to do it wrong, and they WILL be a threat to be cuffed and stuffed.

If you just ignore those places that are improperly posted, for any reason or excuse, and do business with them, you are providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

Clear enough now?[/quote]

You can't hear my voice, so you're just going to have to take my word for it that I'm just wanting information here instead of a fight. Now any business can try to prosecute you for carrying past their non-compliant sign, and they can try to prosecute you for carrying past their gunbuster sign, but in the end, the law is quite unambiguous as to how the sign is to be posted. It's a black and white issue-A compliant sign means don't go in, an non-compliant sign means go in. Now when those signs become compliant due to outside influences, then it becomes illegal to enter with a concealed handgun. This is the law, not someone's opinion. I can't debate intent, or pretend laws, or how liberal business would like the law to be, that's just too much for me.

I appreciate you clarifying your position-I truly didn't understand until now.

Embalmo

[Embalmo]

One of my doctor's offices has a clearly non-compliant 30.06 posting. The office serves about 8 doctors. At the conclusion of my latest visit, I asked him if he knew what 30.06 means, and he as expected answered "No, what's that?". After a brief explanation of the law and telling him there was one on the building and that I was a CHL and was not safe in his office because of the 30.06, I gave him one of the TSRA "No guns = No money" cards. He was receptive; he agreed it was a foolish sign that no crazy/criminal person would obey; he said he would ask the office manager about why it was up and could they get it removed. I NEVER said the sign was not compliant or even hinted at it. My goal is to get it removed but not replaced with a compliant sign.

Your thoughts, comment, and slings and arrows are welcome.

In a perfect world you've got an excellent idea, but in the real world whether you're pro, or anti, you're just going to decrease the number of places to legally carry. Want that?