TexasCHLforum.com

jmra wrote:

casp625 wrote:So... If I am wearing OWB with a really thin shirt and come across a 30.07 sign, will pulling my shirt over and having extreme printing be considered OC or CC? Technically, that could be considered partially visible/wholly visible since anyone would be able to tell there is a holster handgun underneath the shirt. I guess an owner could always just verbally tell me to leave otherwise.

It would be concealed carry. There is no "printing" law.

I'm not so sure. Just because it has a thin layer of material over it doesn't necessarily mean it is concealed. A holstered gun under a really thin shirt with extreme printing may be openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person that it is a gun.

(3) “Concealed handgun” means a handgun, the presence of which is not
openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.

C-dub wrote:

jmra wrote:

casp625 wrote:So... If I am wearing OWB with a really thin shirt and come across a 30.07 sign, will pulling my shirt over and having extreme printing be considered OC or CC? Technically, that could be considered partially visible/wholly visible since anyone would be able to tell there is a holster handgun underneath the shirt. I guess an owner could always just verbally tell me to leave otherwise.

It would be concealed carry. There is no "printing" law.

I'm not so sure. Just because it has a thin layer of material over it doesn't necessarily mean it is concealed. A holstered gun under a really thin shirt with extreme printing may be openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person that it is a gun.

(3) “Concealed handgun” means a handgun, the presence of which is not
openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.

Worst that would happen is you would be asked to leave, unless you intentionally displayed. I still contend that it would be considered CC - just poorly done.

CleverNickname wrote:

suthdj wrote:So on Jan 1 when I walk into IKEA I just need to tuck in my shirt unless they post a 30.07

Well, there is the fact that it will be obvious that you're carrying, so assuming Ikea doesn't want anyone carrying in their stores, no matter the method, then all that will be required is verbal notification telling you to leave.

I wonder if any store employee can give verbal notice or does it need to be a member of management?

Right2Carry wrote:

CleverNickname wrote:

suthdj wrote:So on Jan 1 when I walk into IKEA I just need to tuck in my shirt unless they post a 30.07

Well, there is the fact that it will be obvious that you're carrying, so assuming Ikea doesn't want anyone carrying in their stores, no matter the method, then all that will be required is verbal notification telling you to leave.

I wonder if any store employee can give verbal notice or does it need to be a member of management?

Interesting question - I would leave if the stock boy said something as I wouldn't want to be the test case. Of course I wouldn't OC where 30.06 is posted in the first place.

Right2Carry wrote:

CleverNickname wrote:

suthdj wrote:So on Jan 1 when I walk into IKEA I just need to tuck in my shirt unless they post a 30.07

Well, there is the fact that it will be obvious that you're carrying, so assuming Ikea doesn't want anyone carrying in their stores, no matter the method, then all that will be required is verbal notification telling you to leave.

I wonder if any store employee can give verbal notice or does it need to be a member of management?

(2) “Notice” means:
(A) oral or written communication by the owner or someone with apparent
authority to act for the owner;

Funny thing is I've never noticed the word "apparent" before. Box boy probably doesn't cut it ( no pun intended), but I'm not sure where the line would be drawn on that one.

C-dub wrote:

Right2Carry wrote:

CleverNickname wrote:

suthdj wrote:So on Jan 1 when I walk into IKEA I just need to tuck in my shirt unless they post a 30.07

Well, there is the fact that it will be obvious that you're carrying, so assuming Ikea doesn't want anyone carrying in their stores, no matter the method, then all that will be required is verbal notification telling you to leave.

I wonder if any store employee can give verbal notice or does it need to be a member of management?

(2) “Notice” means:
(A) oral or written communication by the owner or someone with apparent
authority to act for the owner;

Funny thing is I've never noticed the word "apparent" before. Box boy probably doesn't cut it ( no pun intended), but I'm not sure where the line would be drawn on that one.

Be careful with that line of thinking. Lots of small businesses out there that don't have multiple layers of management and any employee speaks for the owner, and some of those places employ CHL holders. Personally, box boy or no, I'd consider that a verbal notice and move along.

If I encountered a situation where an employee asked me to leave because of my open carry, I think I would politely ask to speak with a manager or owner to clarify/confirm the store's policy. If the employee agrees to let me stay while he fetches a manager, I would then assume that the manager speaks on behalf of the owner. If the employee refuses and insists that I leave right away, I would comply and not take any risks. In that case, a follow-up phone call to the owner might be in order.

C-dub wrote:

Right2Carry wrote:

CleverNickname wrote:

suthdj wrote:So on Jan 1 when I walk into IKEA I just need to tuck in my shirt unless they post a 30.07

Well, there is the fact that it will be obvious that you're carrying, so assuming Ikea doesn't want anyone carrying in their stores, no matter the method, then all that will be required is verbal notification telling you to leave.

I wonder if any store employee can give verbal notice or does it need to be a member of management?

(2) “Notice” means:
(A) oral or written communication by the owner or someone with apparent
authority to act for the owner;

Funny thing is I've never noticed the word "apparent" before. Box boy probably doesn't cut it ( no pun intended), but I'm not sure where the line would be drawn on that one.

In this case, who has authority will be confirmed AFTER the fact when someone with true authority does or does not back up the box boy.

Maybe something is getting lost in the Internet here, so I want to make sure I'm not missing something.

You go into a private business openly carrying, you are asked by an employee to leave and you feel like you're entitled to speak to someone else because that employee wasn't a manager or owner?

Taypo wrote:Maybe something is getting lost in the Internet here, so I want to make sure I'm not missing something.

You go into a private business openly carrying, you are asked by an employee to leave and you feel like you're entitled to speak to someone else because that employee wasn't a manager or owner?

Technically it has to be someone with the authority to speak for the organization. Typically this would be a manager or owner.
If it were me and I had temporarily lost my mind and OCed in a store I would leave if anyone with a name tag told me OC was not allowed.

jmra wrote:

Taypo wrote:Maybe something is getting lost in the Internet here, so I want to make sure I'm not missing something.

You go into a private business openly carrying, you are asked by an employee to leave and you feel like you're entitled to speak to someone else because that employee wasn't a manager or owner?

Technically it has to be someone with the authority to speak for the organization. Typically this would be a manager or owner.
If it were me and I had temporarily lost my mind and OCed in a store I would leave if anyone with a name tag told me OC was not allowed.

There is no typically when it comes to small business, which is the point I'm trying to make. If you walk into a 7-11 at 2am, there's probably neither a manager nor an owner present. Same with any number of small businesses, yet it appears as though some of the folks here seem to believe that they have the right to stand where they are and demand to talk to a boss.

If you want to make a phone call after the fact because you don't feel like the "box boy" was correct, go for it. Personally, I'd take my money elsewhere if OC was that important to me.

I think the worst possible thing any of us can do is draw attention to ourselves at this point. Standing in a store arguing about your right to open carry because the person who asked you to leave wasn't powerful enough for you is just that - negative attention.

TexasGal wrote:I am just hoping everyone who is super eager to carry openly exercise a little sensitivity or we may well see a lot of new signage. Too many people have been led by the media to think we are all the same as OCT and the like. It was videos of those wanna be's that were put on the screen just about every time open carry was covered. Let's try our best to "look" and behave a lot better than that to people who seriously may feel afraid or offended at first. Heck, I already have a friend asking me where he can get 30.07 signs for his business. He has a CHL and is not opposed to the open carry law but he is opposed to having to deal with his customer's views on it.

Same situation with me. CHLs are welcome, including employees, but customer reaction to OC is probably going to drive a 30.07.

If any employee asks someone open carrying to leave, there are at least two possible scenarios. One, the person carrying is polite, calm, and apologizes for not knowing it was not allowed and leaves with dignity and class. The other scenario is more like OCT in which the person carrying demands to know if the employee is the boss or the owner and begins to quote the law or the constitution to the employee or threatens to never spend a dime there again. I can not see anyone drawing a good impression of us from that or having the boss be persuaded its ok to open carry. Employees and onlookers are more likely to retain a positive impression in the first scenario and won't have a story for the manager about some jerk with a gun. Like it or not, there is a big difference to many people between open and concealed carry and forcing things has already caused OCT to be held in contempt even by other gun owners. As someone already said, I prefer not to spend my money where there are 30.06 signs but if a business posts only a 30.07 sign, I would still shop there. I worked for 11 years for a dentist who was a wonderful person but he and most of his patients would have had kittens to see an openly visible handgun in the business. It was very effective to carry discretely on body and smile when patients discussed their terrors over guns while one was less than 2 feet away. They were happy. I was happy...and employed.

What about uniformed store security officers? I can see some store personnel, especially those who sweat at the sight of a gun, picking up the phone and "calling security." Can a security guard be seen as "representing the management" and instruct you to leave? Of course, I would excuse myself most politely and leave anyway, but just wondering....

Ruark wrote:It just crossed my mind that some places have the 3006 text etched into the glass. They're going to be ticked off at having to replace it because of a couple of changed words.

I've never seen one of these but it doesn't sound like that provides a "contrasting background".