Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

This forum will be open on Sept. 1, 2016.

Moderators: Keith B, Charles L. Cotton, carlson1

Locked

Topic author
Ruark
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1091
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:11 pm

Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

#1

Post by Ruark » Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:32 am

All kinds of what-if questions arise from these bills. So if unlicensed carry becomes legal, what will be the new signage requirements for businesses that don't want to permit concealed and/or open carry? The current 06/07 signage will be obsolete (again...). They won't be happy about it, for sure, especially those that have the text embossed on a big front glass window.

Would the new signage refer to specific code (like the current signs refer to 30.06), or is it possible that plain "no guns" signs would become viable?

And what about reciprocity with other states? Would you need to go to class and get a LTC just so you can carry in another state? Would there even BE any LTC classes? After all, this would cut the demand for them down to virtually zero.

Other things would go away, too, e.g. buying a gun without a NICS check, and the "CHL line" at the Capitol building.

I'll digress, but I can think of several cans of worms that this would open.
-Ruark


apostate
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2233
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 10:01 am

Re: Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

#2

Post by apostate » Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:35 am

Impossible to say until the committee substitute is reported favorably out of committee, and the bill text is public.


TrueFlog
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 377
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:07 pm

Re: Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

#3

Post by TrueFlog » Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:18 pm

According to the press release for HB1911, a new sign called 30.08 would be created to prevent carry by unlicensed persons. This sign would apply to unlicensed open carry and concealed carry, but would not apply to persons with an LTC. The law would not change 30.06 and 30.07; those would remain in place and apply only to persons with a license. If a business wants to completely prohibit carry, they would have to post all three signs. If they only want to prevent unlicensed carry, they would post only 30.08.

The press release also indicates that the current process for obtaining a Texas LTC would not change. If you want an LTC, you can still take the class, submit fingerprints, etc. If you already have an LTC, nothing changes. Persons with an LTC would continue to enjoy the current benefits - reciprocity with other states, skipping the NICS check, etc. Persons without an LTC would be able to carry but would be subject to the NICS check when purchasing a firearm and would potentially enjoy reciprocity in fewer states. (It would depend on the other state's laws concerning reciprocity.)

User avatar

Lynyrd
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1187
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 10:20 am
Location: East Texas

Re: Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

#4

Post by Lynyrd » Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:29 pm

If I read HB1911 correctly, and it may get changed in committee, a person without an LTC would still be breaking the law carrying past a TABC blue sign. And those are on every store that sells beer.
Do what you say you're gonna do.


Topic author
Ruark
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1091
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

#5

Post by Ruark » Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:49 pm

TrueFlog wrote:According to the press release for HB1911, a new sign called 30.08 would be created to prevent carry by unlicensed persons. This sign would apply to unlicensed open carry and concealed carry, but would not apply to persons with an LTC.
A couple of things jump out at me from this:

- So businesses wanting to keep guns out would need yet ANOTHER big sign. That's going to go over with them like a lead balloon (and hey, maybe that's a good thing!). I've seen many entrances that don't even HAVE a place to put a third pair of signs. I say "pair" because presumably they'd need one in English and one in Spanish. So instead of 4, they'd have 6. It could get to the point of being unreasonable for someone entering the building to have to stop and stand there and read all those signs.

-
This sign would apply to unlicensed open carry and concealed carry
So businesses preferring to prohibit unlicensed open carry, but are cool with unlicensed concealed carry, wouldn't have that option. They would have to either ban both or ban neither. I suspect most would choose the former.

I'm sure eventually somebody will propose a "solution": just a single sign that covers everything.

What a mess.
-Ruark


locke_n_load
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 973
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 3:35 pm

Re: Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

#6

Post by locke_n_load » Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:53 pm

During 1911 hearing, Terry Holcomb recommended that the 30.08 sign requirement should be moved to just 30.05 (guessing a gun buster sign would keep out unlicensed carriers). 30.06/07 stays exactly the same.

I believe the bill has code to amend or remove the TABC blue sign (was dumb in the first place).
"They that would give up Essential Liberty, for a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

EDC - Glock 26 Gen IV
CHL Holder since 10/08


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 3603
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

#7

Post by Soccerdad1995 » Thu Mar 30, 2017 1:19 pm

Ruark wrote:
TrueFlog wrote:According to the press release for HB1911, a new sign called 30.08 would be created to prevent carry by unlicensed persons. This sign would apply to unlicensed open carry and concealed carry, but would not apply to persons with an LTC.
A couple of things jump out at me from this:

- So businesses wanting to keep guns out would need yet ANOTHER big sign. That's going to go over with them like a lead balloon (and hey, maybe that's a good thing!). I've seen many entrances that don't even HAVE a place to put a third pair of signs. I say "pair" because presumably they'd need one in English and one in Spanish. So instead of 4, they'd have 6. It could get to the point of being unreasonable for someone entering the building to have to stop and stand there and read all those signs.

-
This sign would apply to unlicensed open carry and concealed carry
So businesses preferring to prohibit unlicensed open carry, but are cool with unlicensed concealed carry, wouldn't have that option. They would have to either ban both or ban neither. I suspect most would choose the former.

I'm sure eventually somebody will propose a "solution": just a single sign that covers everything.

What a mess.
Any business owner can easily restrict unlicensed (and licensed) open carry with no signage at all. Just instruct all employees to say the following to anyone who is openly carrying:

"Excuse me, sir/madame. While we fully support and encourage your right to keep and bear arms, we also have some delusional and paranoid customers, and we are afraid that they may go on a deranged tirade if they see a gun. So could you please untuck your shirt a bit? Thank you so much."

Or words to that effect.
Ding dong, the witch is dead


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 3603
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

#8

Post by Soccerdad1995 » Thu Mar 30, 2017 1:20 pm

Ruark wrote:
TrueFlog wrote:According to the press release for HB1911, a new sign called 30.08 would be created to prevent carry by unlicensed persons. This sign would apply to unlicensed open carry and concealed carry, but would not apply to persons with an LTC.
A couple of things jump out at me from this:

- So businesses wanting to keep guns out would need yet ANOTHER big sign. That's going to go over with them like a lead balloon (and hey, maybe that's a good thing!). I've seen many entrances that don't even HAVE a place to put a third pair of signs. I say "pair" because presumably they'd need one in English and one in Spanish. So instead of 4, they'd have 6. It could get to the point of being unreasonable for someone entering the building to have to stop and stand there and read all those signs.

-
This sign would apply to unlicensed open carry and concealed carry
So businesses preferring to prohibit unlicensed open carry, but are cool with unlicensed concealed carry, wouldn't have that option. They would have to either ban both or ban neither. I suspect most would choose the former.

I'm sure eventually somebody will propose a "solution": just a single sign that covers everything.

What a mess.
Any business owner can easily restrict unlicensed (and licensed) open carry with no signage at all. Just instruct all employees to say the following to anyone who is openly carrying:

"Excuse me, sir/madame. While we fully support and encourage your right to keep and bear arms, we also have some delusional and paranoid customers, and we are afraid that they may go on a deranged tirade if they see a gun. So could you please untuck your shirt a bit? Thank you so much."

Or words to that effect.
Ding dong, the witch is dead


ninjabread
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Reciprocity and signage if 375/1911 passes???

#9

Post by ninjabread » Thu Mar 30, 2017 6:10 pm

Ruark wrote:All kinds of what-if questions arise from these bills. So if unlicensed carry becomes legal, what will be the new signage requirements for businesses that don't want to permit concealed and/or open carry?
They will have to post signs with red letters at least one inch high on a white or yellow opaque background with the text "FIREARMS POLICY NOTICE. LICENCED CARRY PROHIBITED. UNLICENSED CARRY PROHIBITED. NO GUNS ALLOWED PAST THIS POINT. THIS MEANS YOU." in English, Spanish and Vietnamese.
This is my opinion. There are many like it, but this one is mine.


Locked

Return to “2017 Texas Legislative Session”