TexasCHLforum.com

PriestTheRunner wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:17 pm

Scott in Houston wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:46 pm It's driven by their #1 expense, liability insurance. They're required to post.

I'm still waiting to hear this from someone who actually underwrites insurance or see it in writing on an insurance plan.

Its the excuse most of my previous employers have used, and yet I have extreme doubts about how truthful that is. If they can't show me a piece of paper saying 'this insurance is based on the exclusion of legally owned firearms from your property', then I will absolutely never believe it. That like a rental insurance agreement stipulating no candles may be used in the building... It doesn't exist.

carlson1 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:43 pm OC caused my doctors office to post both signs and they are still up. I just got back in my vehicle after the doctor visit and got my pistol out of the safe. All these years I carried concealed and the doctor knew, but did not care and he still doesn’t, but the hospital he is connected to does.

Ruark wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 10:24 am

Scott in Houston wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 5:27 pm I’d prefer no new sign legislation of any type. Any time a light shines on the concept of signage, it tends to create collateral damage that is not positive for those of us who carry.

This is true. I visited Senator Huffman's office a couple of years ago after the big open carry law foofooraw and spent an hour chatting with her assistant. He said the posting of 06/07 signs had skyrocketed since the OC legislation debate, simply because it brought so much publicity and public awareness. Before then, most people had never heard of a "30.06 sign." Subsequently, there was an explosion of commercial sign producers selling them online and in stores, with marketing hype like, "Be sure your business is in full compliance with the new laws!!!" So businesses snatched them up so they could "be in full compliance," including dingbats like the convenience store owner who posted one "so he wouldn't get robbed." Many business owners have seen the light since then, but still, the damage was done. Now we have signs all over the place, and nobody is open carrying.

It's probably a foregone conclusion that an attempt to eliminate the signs completely, which has utterly no chance of passing, would generate another wave of such "collateral damage."