I think they should be made to wear the right shoes. I don't much care if they swap out a non-compliant sign for a compliant one, if they have a non-compliant one up then there is a chance that I will ignore it, as non-compliant, and they might discover that I am carrying, and then I have to go through all of the legal hassle and the "property owner's intent" (which isn't part of the law.GrillKing wrote:I don't think we want to force them to 'wear the right shoes'. This will let the 'cat out of the bag' and the vast majority of signs that are non-compliant will be swapped out for signs that are compliant. The law clearly states the requirement for effective notice. If someone chooses to not give effective notice, either deliberately or because they choose not to investigate the legal requirements for what they do, why should we educate them?stevie_d_64 wrote: Because if your going to dance, you should wear the right shoes...Otherwise you will get blisters...
We wear the right shoes...
(this is a horrible analogy, but I figure it may somewhat illustrate the parity between the CHL community and the other side of the coin)
They are still in the game, just not calling the best plays....
In short, if they are going to say it, they should be made to say it right.
Then I will leave them a card and take my business elsewhere knowing that I will not have to put up with harassment just because the owner couldn't bother to comply with the law. No loss to me.
And if I make them change the sign, beside my not ever spending any money there, it will have cost them to make the change.
And as KD5NRH said "any sign that purports to give information about an issue of legality should be subject to certain standards of civil and criminal liability. "