TexasCHLforum.com

jimlongley wrote:Jury "Guilty in the first degree, of sheer stupidity."

We have a right to be silent. I would let my lawyer talk to the DA for me instead of being stupid.

I go to this theater all the time. I buy my tickets at the self serve kiosk. I have yet to see a sign....

boomerang wrote:

jimlongley wrote:Jury "Guilty in the first degree, of sheer stupidity."

We have a right to be silent. I would let my lawyer talk to the DA for me instead of being stupid.

All I know is I am taking my own water and candy into the theater...no matter the penalty. If they catch me, I will do like you and refuse to speak until I get my lawyer. I think the odds of getting caught are pretty slim as long as your water and candy are properly concealed. They have no way of catching us unless they have x-ray vision.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

boomerang wrote:

jimlongley wrote:Jury "Guilty in the first degree, of sheer stupidity."

We have a right to be silent. I would let my lawyer talk to the DA for me instead of being stupid.

All I know is I am taking my own water and candy into the theater...no matter the penalty. If they catch me, I will do like you and refuse to speak until I get my lawyer. I think the odds of getting caught are pretty slim as long as your water and candy are properly concealed. They have no way of catching us unless they have x-ray vision.

I hope your water bottle and candy wrapper aren't micro-stamped

Side Note:

I stopped going to AMC because of the 30.6 sign.

Anti-CHL businesses don't deserved my hard earn money.

Cinemark is the only movie theater I would go for a movie now.

We've got a nice Wallace theater near us with nary a sign to be seen. I'd have preferred to just go there, but like I said, free tickets...
In any case, if given the choice, I won't be going to AMC anymore.

C-dub wrote:While I still think the "sign" in some of these ticket booth windows is not valid. I do worry that some of these places may figure out the thing about printing the wording on the back of a ticket. However, like my own employer, they apparently either don't care to find out how to follow the rules, only want to appear to restrict weapons, or have poor lawyers advising them.

A little nit-pick, I could not resist.
You should say "incompetent" lawyers. IMO most lawyers are not poor, particularly the ones working for large firms.

silverap1 wrote:Side Note:

I stopped going to AMC because of the 30.6 sign.

Anti-CHL businesses don't deserved my hard earn money.

Cinemark is the only movie theater I would go for a movie now.

Have you informed AMC of your decision and their lost business? Doesn't do much good to "silently" protest. A well-written, poignant letter to coroporate office stating your disagreement with their decision and boycott of their business probably won't do much, but it could get someone's attention. And if all of us write a letter, it could get more attention.

silverap1 wrote:Side Note:

I stopped going to AMC because of the 30.6 sign.

Anti-CHL businesses don't deserved my hard earn money.

Cinemark is the only movie theater I would go for a movie now.

Same here. The theater here in west Plano used to be known as Tinseltown and sported a gunbuster sign but no 30.06. They were recently bought out by Cinemark, and now even the gunbuster is gone.

DrinkRaiderade wrote:The signs I have seen use normal font UPPER and lower case letters, not BLOCK LETTERING as required.

This brings up a good question - what exactly does "block lettering" mean? Does it simply mean not-cursive, or does it mean something more, such as all-caps? Also, does the 1" requirement apply to all the letters? If a sign uses upper and lower case, a capital 'A' may be an inch tall whereas a lowercase 'a' may only be a half-inch. Would that make the sign unenforceable? (My employer recently posted 30.06's in the parking lot, but only the first letter of each sentence is capitalized, and only the capital letters are 1" high.)

TrueFlog wrote: This brings up a good question - what exactly does "block lettering" mean? Does it simply mean not-cursive, or does it mean something more, such as all-caps? Also, does the 1" requirement apply to all the letters? If a sign uses upper and lower case, a capital 'A' may be an inch tall whereas a lowercase 'a' may only be a half-inch. Would that make the sign unenforceable? (My employer recently posted 30.06's in the parking lot, but only the first letter of each sentence is capitalized, and only the capital letters are 1" high.)

IANAL, but if I saw a sign with 1-inch tall capital letters followed by 1/2 inch tall lower-cased letters I think I would say "close enough" and not enter. Why be the legal test case?

austinrealtor wrote:

TrueFlog wrote: This brings up a good question - what exactly does "block lettering" mean? Does it simply mean not-cursive, or does it mean something more, such as all-caps? Also, does the 1" requirement apply to all the letters? If a sign uses upper and lower case, a capital 'A' may be an inch tall whereas a lowercase 'a' may only be a half-inch. Would that make the sign unenforceable? (My employer recently posted 30.06's in the parking lot, but only the first letter of each sentence is capitalized, and only the capital letters are 1" high.)

IANAL, but if I saw a sign with 1-inch tall capital letters followed by 1/2 inch tall lower-cased letters I think I would say "close enough" and not enter. Why be the legal test case?

I would assume the sign to be good enough also. I don't carry around a tape measure and like most guys I tend to over estimate when it comes to measurements. So if I saw a 30.06 sign, regardless of size, I am no longer going to be a customer. A gun buster sign, on the other hand, tells me they don't want unlicensed carry and I go right on in.

austinrealtor wrote:IANAL, but if I saw a sign with 1-inch tall capital letters followed by 1/2 inch tall lower-cased letters I think I would say "close enough" and not enter. Why be the legal test case?

To provide the best security to my wife and child that I can. That's enough "why" for me.
"Close enough" isn't close enough to risk their safety. That's my opinion alone, and anyone else is free to disagree.

kauboy wrote:

austinrealtor wrote:IANAL, but if I saw a sign with 1-inch tall capital letters followed by 1/2 inch tall lower-cased letters I think I would say "close enough" and not enter. Why be the legal test case?

To provide the best security to my wife and child that I can. That's enough "why" for me.
"Close enough" isn't close enough to risk their safety. That's my opinion alone, and anyone else is free to disagree.

I may be wrong, but I think your saying the same thing he did. That is if your saying you won't disarm, so that means you won't be doing business there.

austinrealtor wrote:

silverap1 wrote:Side Note:

I stopped going to AMC because of the 30.6 sign.

Anti-CHL businesses don't deserved my hard earn money.

Cinemark is the only movie theater I would go for a movie now.

Have you informed AMC of your decision and their lost business? Doesn't do much good to "silently" protest. A well-written, poignant letter to coroporate office stating your disagreement with their decision and boycott of their business probably won't do much, but it could get someone's attention. And if all of us write a letter, it could get more attention.

It depends what's your goal. If you want the company to change their policy then I agree that it helps to complain. But if my goal is to see a movie or shop or eat lunch without disarming, and other businesses don't post, then it's good enough to vote with my feet. And my pocketbook.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

kauboy wrote:

austinrealtor wrote:IANAL, but if I saw a sign with 1-inch tall capital letters followed by 1/2 inch tall lower-cased letters I think I would say "close enough" and not enter. Why be the legal test case?

To provide the best security to my wife and child that I can. That's enough "why" for me.
"Close enough" isn't close enough to risk their safety. That's my opinion alone, and anyone else is free to disagree.

I may be wrong, but I think your saying the same thing he did. That is if your saying you won't disarm, so that means you won't be doing business there.

Actually, no. I would still enter the facility if I had a desire to. But I will not disarm to comply with a non-compliant sign.
They aren't responsible for the safety of my family. I am. And I will always carry for potential protection wherever legally able.