Require All Prohibited Places to Post

This sub-forum will open on Sept. 1, 2018

Moderators: Keith B, Charles L. Cotton, carlson1

User avatar

Scott in Houston
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1483
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:19 am
Location: Houston

Re: Require All Prohibited Places to Post

#16

Post by Scott in Houston » Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:23 pm

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."

Totally agree.

I had a couple of businesses near me that had no signs and then ended up posting both signs after the 06/07 stuff came out.
I got one to remove the .06 sign through a letter I wrote which led to a phone call. It turns out, the owner, was fine with concealed carry but was told by some sign sales person or company that to prohibit open carry, you had to post both signs. He was told that both signs were required to be posted together. :banghead:

When I walked him through the purpose of each sign and showed him that no where in the law does it say you must post both signs, he removed the 30.06 and let the 30.07.
It took me quite a bit of time just to influence this one place with a very friendly owner.

User avatar

carlson1
Moderator
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 9649
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:11 am

Re: Require All Prohibited Places to Post

#17

Post by carlson1 » 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. :mad5 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.
Image

User avatar

Scott in Houston
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1483
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:19 am
Location: Houston

Re: Require All Prohibited Places to Post

#18

Post by Scott in Houston » Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:46 pm

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. :mad5 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.
Yes. I don't think there's a legit hospital in Texas that hasn't posted both. It's driven by their #1 expense, liability insurance. They're required to post.

User avatar

PriestTheRunner
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 5:33 pm

Re: Require All Prohibited Places to Post

#19

Post by PriestTheRunner » 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.

User avatar

Scott in Houston
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1483
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:19 am
Location: Houston

Re: Require All Prohibited Places to Post

#20

Post by Scott in Houston » Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:23 pm

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.
I'm going off what a friend of mine who used to run all of Memorial Herman (in Houston) told me. I thought he was fairly credible as he's gun friendly personally.


jordanmills
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 11:42 am

Re: Require All Prohibited Places to Post

#21

Post by jordanmills » Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:15 am

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.
You'll never see that paper...

Post Reply

Return to “2019 Texas Legislative Session”