TexasCHLforum.com

Here's the issue. I know of a number of churches, like this one http://www.emmanuel-houston.org/weapons-policy, that post 30.06 verbiage on-line. They may or may not post the requisite signage on site. In this case of this parish, I have not checked. I have yet to see an Episcopal parish that actually posted the signage, probably because it doesn't fit their decor.

Anyway, my question is whether on-line notification constitutes an "...or other document..." notification per 30.06 (3) (A).

Thanks, Happy New Year, and Gig'Em Aggies. John

I never read the web site... so... how would I have been "notified"?

My guess is yes, it constitutes notice...if you've read it on the website. If you did not read it, you did not receive notice.

ELB wrote:My guess is yes, it constitutes notice...if you've read it on the website. If you did not read it, you did not receive notice.

Only if you zoom in where the letters are 1" big on your monitor.

bbhack wrote:

ELB wrote:My guess is yes, it constitutes notice...if you've read it on the website. If you did not read it, you did not receive notice.

Only if you zoom in where the letters are 1" big on your monitor.

I see what you did there...wait, did you do it? Well I guess you have been given notice!...lol

I personally do not see how they have fulfilled the requirements of notification as stated by Texas Law.

They haven't.

There are a lot of good churches out there I'm sure.

Simply find one that allows self defense with a firearm.

RogueUSMC wrote:

bbhack wrote:

ELB wrote:My guess is yes, it constitutes notice...if you've read it on the website. If you did not read it, you did not receive notice.

Only if you zoom in where the letters are 1" big on your monitor.

I see what you did there...wait, did you do it? Well I guess you have been given notice!...lol

Now you can't conceal carry while you're on their web site!

J.R.@A&M wrote:Here's the issue. I know of a number of churches, like this one http://www.emmanuel-houston.org/weapons-policy, that post 30.06 verbiage on-line. They may or may not post the requisite signage on site. In this case of this parish, I have not checked. I have yet to see an Episcopal parish that actually posted the signage, probably because it doesn't fit their decor.

Anyway, my question is whether on-line notification constitutes an "...or other document..." notification per 30.06 (3) (A).

Thanks, Happy New Year, and Gig'Em Aggies. John

No habla ingles.

My analysis is this...

30.05, 30.06, and 30.07 require SIGNAGE to be placed conspicuously and clearly visible to the public. It would seem that the purpose for this is to ensure that the person to who the prohibition applies actually gets the message. There is an implied "you can't reasonably or fairly be held responsible if we don't ensure you get the message". So the legislature writes that into the law.

As to written documentation in .06/.07 the owner or person acting on the owners authority must...provide notice by.... Those words must mean something other than simply writing a notice on some medium and expecting that the intended receiver will haphazardly come to see it. It would seem that to provide the written document there must be a more deliberately targeted act than simply leaving the notice to be found by serendipity, such as might be the case with a visiter to a church. Members of the church, it could be argued, are made aware of the rules of the organization...perhaps.

But a deliberate providing of a notice to a person seems implied with written documents. Keep in mind there are three methods of notification. With oral there is an implied requirement that the oral notice is personally targeted and direct. With signage there is a requirement of conspicuousness. If this were not the case with written documents then it would the the only one of the three that does not require direct provision to the intended receiver. This does not seem likely.

Otherwise, they could simply leave written documents laying around and claim that they provided you with notice. Remember, a prosecutor must prove you were provided notice.

So my conclusion is that merely posting the notice on the website, although it is probably considered a written document does not meet the requirement of providing notice...IF...the direct provision theory is correct.

tex

My analysis is that the website for a church, apparently set up by the church, provides information and policies by the owners and people authorized by the owners. If you take the time to read the site, and click through to the weapons policy (nothing haphazard about that, you did it), and read the statutorily correct language provided there, then you have been provided notice.

If may be another matter to prove that you read it in court, but that is a separate issue, and an interesting one from a moral stand point.

I've visited a lot of churches without looking at their website.

In the case of a hotel that only provides notice on the online booking page; that's a pretty incomplete notification. Most large hotels have meeting rooms and restaurants within the definition of 'premises'. If I'm there for a seminar, or to have lunch with a client, if they don't post signs at the doors, I haven't been notified as per the statute.

ELB wrote:My analysis is that the website for a church, apparently set up by the church, provides information and policies by the owners and people authorized by the owners. If you take the time to read the site, and click through to the weapons policy (nothing haphazard about that, you did it), and read the statutorily correct language provided there, then you have been provided notice.

If may be another matter to prove that you read it in court, but that is a separate issue, and an interesting one from a moral stand point.

I have a personal website. I think I'll post the wording on it so everyone visiting my home will have notification not to carry at my home!

Really???

It's not the job of a visiter to seek out all possible places where there might be written documents prohibiting carry. If it is and I find none then what if I failed to look far enough? What if I miss one?

The owner must provide notice. That provision must be effectual and not depend on serendipitous discovery or it's meaningless.

tex