TexasCHLforum.com

As An instructor I tell the class red 51% and 30.06 signs are the legal signs and the no guns allowed signs are an attemped to keep you out.
As a CHL holder I walked into a bank and noticed a no guns allowed sign on one entrance only. I ask the officer on duty about the sign and he said if they post a sign you can't carry.
that makes me want to rethink the way I explain signs.
Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Your an instructor -- what's the law say?
Are you going to believe what you've been taught (and teach), or are you going to believe some unknown "officer"?

sjfcontrol wrote:Your an instructor -- what's the law say?
Are you going to believe what you've been taught (and teach), or are you going to believe some unknown "officer"?

It's not a what's right thing that i am worried about. it's more how do you tell your class that what you have learned here may not be what you encounter out there. I can tell them whats right but, if they carry in that bank with that officer on duty and he sees something he does not like, they could be in trouble. Then they are telling the officer, thats not what they said in my class.

Why even bother asking the officer, or anyone else? The sign doesn't mean anything to the CHL holder. What trouble can they get into? If the officer somehow finds out about the concealed weapon then he can ask them to leave. If they immediately leave then no law has been broken. If it goes beyond this then the CHL holder is liable to get a nice deposit when the smoke clears.

By asking the officer you were given effective notice in an otherwise permissable place.

Shhhhhhhhh

As an instructor, we present and explain the law to the students. We cannot interpret the law for them.

When I (in my capacity as a CHL holder) walk right past a gunbuster (as many here do) that's my personal take on it--never-mind that it's backed by the written law. I won't necessarily advocate (in my capacity as an instructor) someone else doing that--but I will mention that it's not in violation of the law as written.

I won't address the "oral notification" that you may receive if you specifically ask someone about a gunbuster sign--that's a whole other kettle of fish.

Most importantly, in the context you mention, concealed is concealed. Until it's brought up, the sign LEGALLY has as much weight as the "no shoes, no shirt, no service" sign at the 7-11.

The "no shoes, no shirt, no service" spiel is part of my discussion, as are displays of properly worded/presented 30.06 signs and TABC red/blue signs....

cbunt1 wrote:As an instructor, we present and explain the law to the students. We cannot interpret the law for them.

When I (in my capacity as a CHL holder) walk right past a gunbuster (as many here do) that's my personal take on it--never-mind that it's backed by the written law. I won't necessarily advocate (in my capacity as an instructor) someone else doing that--but I will mention that it's not in violation of the law as written.

I won't address the "oral notification" that you may receive if you specifically ask someone about a gunbuster sign--that's a whole other kettle of fish.

Most importantly, in the context you mention, concealed is concealed. Until it's brought up, the sign LEGALLY has as much weight as the "no shoes, no shirt, no service" sign at the 7-11.

The "no shoes, no shirt, no service" spiel is part of my discussion, as are displays of properly worded/presented 30.06 signs and TABC red/blue signs....

Go ahead and correct me because I'm probably wrong, but I always thought the shoes and shirt thing had something to do with the department of health because they served "food" there. I know we don't see signs like that at other eateries, but that's what I always figured.

Art S wrote:As An instructor I tell the class red 51% and 30.06 signs are the legal signs and the no guns allowed signs are an attemped to keep you out.
As a CHL holder I walked into a bank and noticed a no guns allowed sign on one entrance only. I ask the officer on duty about the sign and he said if they post a sign you can't carry.
that makes me want to rethink the way I explain signs.
Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

I am not an instructor, but I've been to three classes now. I would show them examples of the valid signs and then various examples of signs that do not meet the minimum legal requirements.

I never did agree with the whole "Don't ask, don't tell" policy, but a variation of it works here nicely. "Don't ask, so they can't tell" someone not to bring a gun in someplace. I was a little slow in learning this, but did finally figure it out on my own after a couple of years carrying. Unfortunately, that was long before I found this forum and possibly, I think, before it existed.

I tell my students not to count on every LEO knowing every law.

bkj wrote:I tell my students not to count on every LEO knowing every law.

That was mentioned in my recent class.

C-dub wrote: Go ahead and correct me because I'm probably wrong, but I always thought the shoes and shirt thing had something to do with the department of health because they served "food" there. I know we don't see signs like that at other eateries, but that's what I always figured.

Nope, no corrections. You're exactly right. The point I make about the No Shoes, No Shirt signs is that it doesn't have the force of law; that is to say you walk past it baresark and barefoot, and you still haven't committed criminal trespass; but when asked to either cover up or leave, and you don't then you're guilty of trespass.

Same with non-compliant 30.06 or gun buster signs. A mere suggestion, until you receive oral notification not to carry, but once you do then you're guilty of trespass.

The "rant" loses a little bit in translation to the written word though LOL

superchief wrote:I think we ought to preach "dont carry there, don't spend money there" to all our students.

I am not an instructor and I don't think instructors should "preach" about anything except for gun safety and knowing the relavent laws about deadly force.

During Houston Rodeo, I asked a LEO - who also is a volunteer -- whether vis-a-vis CHL concerns --- "Is the rodeo inside stadium a " 'Professional Sporting Event.' "

He pondered, replied that he didn't really know, but would ask other LEOs who were patrolling inside stadium.
He did assert that the grounds on Reliant Park should be no problem.

AS we were walking into the stadium, he then said "If I currently had a CHL problem -- he would help me out." {A friendly LEO }

WildBill wrote:

superchief wrote:I think we ought to preach "dont carry there, don't spend money there" to all our students.

I am not an instructor and I don't think instructors should "preach" about anything except for gun safety and knowing the relavent laws about deadly force.

I teach the Course and I try to keep my personal opinions at bay. If a students asks an "opinion" type question then I will try to give them all the sides I can think of. Anything I "throw in" I am very careful to preface it with a "this is my opinion" qualifier then give them the pro and cons to the topic to the best of my knowledge. Completely unbiased? Certainly not but I try to give the students something to think about so they can make their own educated decisions.

Pertaining to specifically 30.06.
I teach not to carry in 30.06 establisments per the law. All other signs are the student's choice. I tell them that I don't know why they posted a non-30.06 sign. It could be they don't know the law. It could be the insurance company, parent company, corporate, etc. makes them post some kind of sign. It could be a "tack-on" charge if somebody robs them at gunpoint. It could be they really don't want CHLs money. It could be it was on the window when they moved in and they don't even notice it. It is not my place to determine the intent under which they posted the non-30.06 sign. I only know that it does not pertain to me. IF they really wanted to keep out CHL holders then they can make the effort to know the law and post the proper sign.

superchief wrote:i show the 2 'legal' signs and talk about how it is illegal to carry in those places.

I also say that if you see an "illegal' sign, then don't carry there either because the business is telling you they don't want to be safe there. Also, they need to call the business and let them know they are not going to do business there for that specific reason.

I think we ought to preach "dont carry there, don't spend money there" to all our students.

A lot of good in-put guys.
I also add "how much money do you have?" "you have to pick your battles" this should not be a battle to fight.