“Gun Busters” sign legal notice

[VoiceofReason]

For those CHL holders that might not know, the “Gun Busters” sign is legal notice for Federal facilities. The “30.06 sign” is not required. The one I saw had a blue background, was about 7 inches square, was posted at almost eye level, had “no guns” in English and Spanish and referenced 18 USC S 930. This code may be found at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/ ... -000-.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Sub-section (h) does not specify the dimensions of the sign, the wording, or the size of lettering.

If I get the chance I will take a picture of the sign and post it on this forum. In Texas the “Gun Busters” sign can be ignored by CHL holders but I would not want to try it at a Federal facility.

Hope this keeps someone out of trouble.

I finally got around to posting a picture of the sign. The sign is about 7 inches square. The print in the lower right corner is the USC I posted the link to.

[Medic218]

Good info, but signage or not you can't carry into a federal building
anyways.

[VoiceofReason]

Good info, but signage or not you can't carry into a federal building
anyways.

You are correct but under sub-section (h) if no notice was posted and someone claimed ignorance of the law, it looks like they would have a pretty good defense.

[A-R]

Interesting, I'd never actually read this before (just always assumed Fed facility = off limits). But this portion intrigues me too:

(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
...
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

emphasis added

Couldn't CHL be construed easily as "other lawful purposes"? Or am I just hoping for common sense in an area of law that knows no such thing?

[VoiceofReason]

Interesting, I'd never actually read this before (just always assumed Fed facility = off limits). But this portion intrigues me too:

(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
...
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

emphasis added

Couldn't CHL be construed easily as "other lawful purposes"? Or am I just hoping for common sense in an area of law that knows no such thing?

Common sense? The Federal government?

[chabouk]

Sub-section (h) does not specify the dimensions of the sign, the wording, or the size of lettering.

I believe it does specify the wording: "(h) Notice of the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility, and notice of subsection (e) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal court facility, and no person shall be convicted of an offense under subsection (a) or (e) with respect to a Federal facility if such notice is not so posted at such facility, unless such person had actual notice of subsection (a) or (e), as the case may be."

A gunbusters sign is not a notice of those provisions.

[cougartex]

Interesting.

[Oldgringo]

Sub-section (h) does not specify the dimensions of the sign, the wording, or the size of lettering.

I believe it does specify the wording: "(h) Notice of the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility, and notice of subsection (e) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal court facility, and no person shall be convicted of an offense under subsection (a) or (e) with respect to a Federal facility if such notice is not so posted at such facility, unless such person had actual notice of subsection (a) or (e), as the case may be."

A gunbusters sign is not a notice of those provisions.

A federal facility is a federal facility. Let us know how that works out for you after you reason with the Federal Marshals on the legality of your "lawful purposes" mission.

A gunbusters sign is very legal notice in some states. Texas may just be unique in its specificity as to CHL carry and notice.
Check it out on http://www.handgunlaw.us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

[VoiceofReason]

I hope no one minds me kicking this back to the top. I finally got a picture of the sign posted and I wanted one more chance for everyone to see it.

[USA1]

Speaking of "Gun Buster" signs, I just noticed this one the other day while taking my son to school.
I don't know how long it's been there but I drive right past it every morning.

[Keith B]

Speaking of "Gun Buster" signs, I just noticed this one the other day while taking my son to school.
I don't know how long it's been there but I drive right past it every morning.

And unless you have a CHL issued by the state you are in, these are valid notification of the Gun Free School Zone (within 1000ft of the school) and the area is illegal for you to carry in.

[chabouk]

Those are stock signs seen all over the country, whether there are any state or local penalties or not.

There are no local penalties for guns in school zones in Texas, for instance.

[ScottDLS]

Those are stock signs seen all over the country, whether there are any state or local penalties or not.

There are no local penalties for guns in school zones in Texas, for instance.

There is a penalty enhancement in Texas PC46.11 that applies to PC Section 46 violations (e.g. unlicensed carry) within 300ft of a school.

[chabouk]

Those are stock signs seen all over the country, whether there are any state or local penalties or not.

There are no local penalties for guns in school zones in Texas, for instance.

There is a penalty enhancement in Texas PC46.11 that applies to PC Section 46 violations (e.g. unlicensed carry) within 300ft of a school.

Yes. That is a state penalty. I said there are no local (i.e., county or municipal) penalties in Texas, because those would be illegal under preemption.