TexasCHLforum.com

v7a wrote:

doc540 wrote:link to the final bill as passed?

It's in the conference report.

thank you

K5GU wrote:Charles, thank you and yours for all the help on this legislation effort. Rock on!

I second that motion.

A big thank you to you Charles and all those that have worked tirelessly to get this done.

v7a wrote:This is the 30.06 language change:

[ Image ]

So on Jan 1, every current 30.06 sign becomes non-compliant because they're not using the new language?

CleverNickname wrote:

v7a wrote:This is the 30.06 language change:

[ Image ]

So on Jan 1, every current 30.06 sign becomes non-compliant because they're not using the new language?

AAAAWWWW. And AMC just spent all that money to make its signs compliant.

Thanks to Charles, NRA, and TSRA for all their work. It has been a wild ride. Come on Campus Carry. With this finished, maybe we can concentrate on the important bills (removing places we can't carry) next session. Thanks to all on this forum, as we were able to take the ride together. We were up-to-date at all times. The experience and insight seen in the members here is phenomenal.

CleverNickname wrote:

v7a wrote:This is the 30.06 language change:

[ Image ]

So on Jan 1, every current 30.06 sign becomes non-compliant because they're not using the new language?

Also, all 30.07 signs have to be posted at each entrance to the property.

Thanks to Mr. Cotton and everyone else what had a hand in this. It was frustrating and exciting to follow it all.

Now maybe I'll strap on the cartridge belt and single action for our Western Heritage Festival.

If my wife will let me, that is...

A few thoughts:

1) I have a feeling that we will see significantly more people practicing open carry in Texas that in other states. As in - I expect to run across one or two on a typical day just going about my business. I have been to open carry states where it seems more academic then practiced.

2) I hope the big box and chain businesses will focus on 30.07 to avoid visible firearms in their establishment and choose to forego the 30.06 signs. They only have so much real estate at entrances and its a valuable marketing and branding location. How great would it be for them to turn it into an either/or decision instead of a both/and?

3) I want to go even farther in thanking Charles and TSRA. I remember back in the late 20-aughts when open carry was not on his agenda of action items. Still, he did one of the most rare things in this day and age - he listened. So did TSRA. They did surveys, they engage in conversation, they took the time to sift through the noise ane overcome the drag of the knuckleheads to find serious and responsible gun owners pushing for the cause. . .which they then adopted so that it could be done the right way (without compromising concealed carry rights), and tactfully maneuvered through the system. multiple times they had to save open carry from the open carry advocates. Look where we are today!

Thanks again to Charles, TSRA, Greg Abbott, Dan Patrick, and anybody else who invested time, energy, and expertise to get this done.

fickman wrote: 2) I hope the big box and chain businesses will focus on 30.07 to avoid visible firearms in their establishment and choose to forego the 30.06 signs. They only have so much real estate at entrances and its a valuable marketing and branding location. How great would it be for them to turn it into an either/or decision instead of a both/and?

I expect that most big box stores will not be posting signage of any kind. Wal-mart has a company-wide policy of not banning guns at any of their stores - whatever local laws allow for, Wal-mart allows and does not add any additional restrictions. Keep in mind also that a few years ago, the Brady Campaign put alot of pressure on Starbucks to forbid open carry at their stores in Seattle. Starbucks stood firm and refused to give in. If a company based in a liberal town like Seattle stood up to the Bradys and refuse to outlaw open carry, I'm optimistic that other companies will be unlikely to prohibit open carry. And, of course, we haven't seen a rash of no-gun signs in other states (like Oklahoma), so I don't expect it to be an issue here.

TrueFlog wrote:

fickman wrote: 2) I hope the big box and chain businesses will focus on 30.07 to avoid visible firearms in their establishment and choose to forego the 30.06 signs. They only have so much real estate at entrances and its a valuable marketing and branding location. How great would it be for them to turn it into an either/or decision instead of a both/and?

I expect that most big box stores will not be posting signage of any kind. Wal-mart has a company-wide policy of not banning guns at any of their stores - whatever local laws allow for, Wal-mart allows and does not add any additional restrictions. Keep in mind also that a few years ago, the Brady Campaign put alot of pressure on Starbucks to forbid open carry at their stores in Seattle. Starbucks stood firm and refused to give in. If a company based in a liberal town like Seattle stood up to the Bradys and refuse to outlaw open carry, I'm optimistic that other companies will be unlikely to prohibit open carry. And, of course, we haven't seen a rash of no-gun signs in other states (like Oklahoma), so I don't expect it to be an issue here.

Agreed. There are a few stores like Sprouts and venues like AMC that have made a policy to ban all guns when possible and I am sure they will post both signs. Even if they don't I know I wouldn't feel comfortable open carrying in a store that was notoriously anti-gun if they had a 30.06 sign posted but no 30.07.

It seems to me they go out of their way to make things more difficult and confusing. Maybe a 30.06 1/2 sign would work for those that want to ban both CC & OC.
What if the person entering the premises is blind? Shouldn't these signs also be in Braille? What would be better is a anti-gun greeter at every door to tell people guns aren't allowed. They could claim it as job creation also. Don't you just love sarcasm? Actually not too far from some of the anti-gun folks ideas.

The Wall wrote:What if the person entering the premises is blind? Shouldn't these signs also be in Braille?

Now there's an idea for 2017! The MOMS will be going crazy, crazier than they are, that is.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

The Wall wrote:What if the person entering the premises is blind? Shouldn't these signs also be in Braille?

Now there's an idea for 2017! The MOMS will be going crazy, crazier than they are, that is.

Chas.

Hey, they should be ADA compliant, right?

Scott Farkus wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

The Wall wrote:What if the person entering the premises is blind? Shouldn't these signs also be in Braille?

Now there's an idea for 2017! The MOMS will be going crazy, crazier than they are, that is.

Chas.

Hey, they should be ADA compliant, right?

Don't forget the other foreign language speakers in the country. Need Mandarin, Portuguese, Arabic, German etc.