Page 3 of 3
Re: What Is Your Opinion
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:37 pm
by Soccerdad1995
PriestTheRunner wrote: Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:48 pm
Legal TABC blue sign, legal 30.06 sign, and illegal 30.07 notice.
Also when the doors are open and it is concealed through 'double' tinted glass I doubt it would be noticeable. Considering its only a class C misdemeanor and disputing the charge in court would entail taking a picture of the doors (when open) and showing the judge that it isn't readily visible would get the ticket dismissed, I wouldn't worry about it. (Keep in mind Class C = judge not jury trial).
However, any business that takes that position is not going to get any future business of mine. Ultimately, If they don't want me to carry then they can correct the sign to be big and ugly on the
outside of the building. I wouldn't go there unless they were the only option.
"Disappearing" signs that may or may not be visible depending on whether the doors are open do not meet the definition of ""Conspicuously posted", IMHO.
Fortunately, that sign wouldn't apply to me anyways though, as a VESP.
Re: What Is Your Opinion
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:16 pm
by C-dub
Soccerdad1995 wrote: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:37 pm
PriestTheRunner wrote: Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:48 pm
Legal TABC blue sign, legal 30.06 sign, and illegal 30.07 notice.
Also when the doors are open and it is concealed through 'double' tinted glass I doubt it would be noticeable. Considering its only a class C misdemeanor and disputing the charge in court would entail taking a picture of the doors (when open) and showing the judge that it isn't readily visible would get the ticket dismissed, I wouldn't worry about it. (Keep in mind Class C = judge not jury trial).
However, any business that takes that position is not going to get any future business of mine. Ultimately, If they don't want me to carry then they can correct the sign to be big and ugly on the
outside of the building. I wouldn't go there unless they were the only option.
"Disappearing" signs that may or may not be visible depending on whether the doors are open do not meet the definition of ""Conspicuously posted", IMHO.
Fortunately, that sign wouldn't apply to me anyways though, as a VESP.
IIRC, just being a VESP isn't enough. Doesn't one have to be actively participating in that capacity to get that exclusion at that time?
Re: What Is Your Opinion
Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:58 pm
by priusron
We need to come up with a sign that says “Bad guys, all persons have been prohibited from carrying on these premises for your convenience”. Then start posting them on windows next to the prohibitive signs. Quit talking to the managers. Just post the sign and maybe they will start getting the message.
Re: What Is Your Opinion
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 9:31 am
by Gator Guy
Lynyrd wrote: Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:28 pm
The Annoyed Man wrote: Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:44 pm
carlson1 wrote: Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:03 pm
What is your opinion on this sign as it is? I guess I walked in the door when they were open because when the doors are open you cannot in anyway see the sign. I did not see it until I was standing outside talking to someone and looked up.
I wished the law was clear on these signs that appear “transparent” on glass.
221A32DE-741F-4D17-9DF5-36531EBDF2CD.jpeg
My opinion is that the sign says in distinct 1” tall block letters:
DO. NOT. SHOP. HERE.
It says, "We don't want your business!"
As long as HLSR keeps posting those signs, they ought to be called the
Santa Anna Livestock Show and Rodeo.
