TexasCHLforum.com

Is this a legal sign?

No, it's not the current required posting. It may have been prior to the 30.06 sign requirements.

In order to provide notice that entry on property by a license holder with a concealed handgun is forbidden, Penal Code Section 30.06(c)(3)(A) requires that a written communication contain the following language:

"PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06, PENAL CODE (TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF A LICENSE TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN) A PERSON LICENSED UNDER SUBCHAPTER H, CHAPTER 411, GOVERNMENT CODE (CONCEALED HANDGUN LAW), MAY NOT ENTER THIS PROPERTY WITH A CONCEALED HANDGUN."


"CONFORME A LA SECCIÓN 30.06 DEL CÔDIGO PENAL (TRASPASAR PORTANDO ARMAS DE FUEGO) PERSONAS CON LICENCIA BAJO DEL SUB-CAPITULO H, CAPITULO 411, CODIGO DE GOBIERNO (LEY DE PORTAR ARMAS), NO DEBEN ENTRAR A ESTA PROPIEDAD PORTANDO UN ARMA DE FUEGO."

The letter also have to be a minimum of 1 inch tall and on a contrasting background.

here are the details,
Penal Code Section 30.06(c)(3)(B) further states that a sign must meet the following requirements:

includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

Old sign quoting Vernon's Civil Code. No longer valid, but the hospital and even police may still believe it is.

It is not illegal. They can post any sign they want. Enforceable? That is a different question. It does not conform to the legal requirements.

IMO, whether the sign is "legal" or not, they have made their "intent" and you have been "given notice".

Better to keep your guns away from this place and save possible grief & inconvenience... Much easier and cheaper than defending your self in Court, IMO.

Running Arrow Bill wrote:IMO, whether the sign is "legal" or not, they have made their "intent" and you have been "given notice".

Isn't that a whole lot like saying a gunbusters sign is "notice" or "intent"?

Nah - carry on!

Thanks for the info.

Running Arrow Bill wrote:IMO, whether the sign is "legal" or not, they have made their "intent" and you have been "given notice".

Better to keep your guns away from this place and save possible grief & inconvenience... Much easier and cheaper than defending your self in Court, IMO.

So, if the hospital was tired of the 45 MPH speed limit in front of their building and posted a cardboard sign written in crayon with a lower speed limit you would feel compelled to comply? Just asking...........

I'd walk by that sign ... I do not possess a handgun under Article 4413 (29 ee)

The sign itself states that it does not apply to you.... It's not addressed to you ... unless you possess a handgun under 4413 (29ee) ...which you don't.

No need to read mail not addressed to me ...

SEE: viewtopic.php?f=53&t=34571#p407475" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RPB wrote:I'd walk by that sign ... I do not possess a handgun under Article 4413 (29 ee)

The sign itself states that it does not apply to you.... It's not addressed to you ... unless you possess a handgun under 4413 (29ee) ...which you don't.

No need to read mail not addressed to me ...

SEE: viewtopic.php?f=53&t=34571#p407475" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Answer is really simple ... if sign says no girls beyond this point, I ask myself ... am I a girl? .... that sign says no guns possessed under that article are allowed ... I ask am I possessing one under that article ... nope ... a policeman might ask himself the same question and arrive at the same answer too .... the sign is only addressed to persons possessing a handgun under 4413(29ee) ...

The sign follows the "spirit of the law." The hospital does not want guns on their premises.

The sign does not follow the "letter of the law." It is not a properly posted 30.06 sign.

That being said, I would not want to go to court over the semantics. Like an earlier posted indicated, it would not be worth my time and hassel trying to defend myself in court.

v-rog wrote:The sign follows the "spirit of the law." The hospital does not want guns on their premises.

The sign does not follow the "letter of the law." It is not a properly posted 30.06 sign.

That being said, I would not want to go to court over the semantics. Like an earlier posted indicated, it would not be worth my time and hassel trying to defend myself in court.

I agree! 100%

It never ceases to amaze me the individuals (no offense intended) that debate over the "validity" of a no gun sign. From my perspective, if anyone or anything indicates to me that I and my stuff are "not wanted" that's enough for me. I do not want to be put in any position to defend my position over some issue of law. I've got better things to do than deal with a lawyer, court system, etc., $$ costs, etc., over any actual or implied rights of mine. Bottomline...unless I HAVE to go to a place where my gun is not wanted, I'll disarm. If, for some unavoidable reason, I have to deal with the "system", then so be it and I'll deal with it. Otherwise, there are other places that would like to have my business.

JMO...

Running Arrow Bill wrote:

v-rog wrote:The sign follows the "spirit of the law." The hospital does not want guns on their premises.

The sign does not follow the "letter of the law." It is not a properly posted 30.06 sign.

That being said, I would not want to go to court over the semantics. Like an earlier posted indicated, it would not be worth my time and hassel trying to defend myself in court.

I agree! 100%

It never ceases to amaze me the individuals (no offense intended) that debate over the "validity" of a no gun sign. From my perspective, if anyone or anything indicates to me that I and my stuff are "not wanted" that's enough for me. I do not want to be put in any position to defend my position over some issue of law. I've got better things to do than deal with a lawyer, court system, etc., $$ costs, etc., over any actual or implied rights of mine. Bottomline...unless I HAVE to go to a place where my gun is not wanted, I'll disarm. If, for some unavoidable reason, I have to deal with the "system", then so be it and I'll deal with it. Otherwise, there are other places that would like to have my business.

JMO...

So you would not pass a gun buster sign without disarming?

Sorry, but ours is a government of laws, not of men or their feelings/intent.
Intent has no bearing at all on this. You are either in compliance with laws pertaining to your behavior in this location, or you are not.
it's black and white, you are legal to carry.