Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton


Odinvalknir
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2018 11:06 am

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

#1051

Post by Odinvalknir » Sun May 06, 2018 2:46 pm

Just curious, what would qualify a sign as improperly posted? Other than the whole size thing and being hidden or not conspicuously placed.


What qualifies a sign for posting in this thread? I'm brand new to CC and have been searching the front of buildings before entering so far lol.

User avatar

Keith B
Moderator
Posts in topic: 43
Posts: 17940
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

#1052

Post by Keith B » Sun May 06, 2018 3:05 pm

Odinvalknir wrote:Just curious, what would qualify a sign as improperly posted? Other than the whole size thing and being hidden or not conspicuously placed.


What qualifies a sign for posting in this thread? I'm brand new to CC and have been searching the front of buildings before entering so far lol.
It should have been covered in your class that government buildings cannot be posted to prohibit concealed carry. Only specific locations in the buildings like courts and meetings can be posted and are off limits.
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member

Psalm 82:3-4


imkopaka
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:30 pm
Location: Lamesa, TX

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

#1053

Post by imkopaka » Sun May 06, 2018 3:09 pm

Odinvalknir wrote:Just curious, what would qualify a sign as improperly posted? Other than the whole size thing and being hidden or not conspicuously placed.


What qualifies a sign for posting in this thread? I'm brand new to CC and have been searching the front of buildings before entering so far lol.
This particular thread is about cities posting signage when they have no right to do so (e.g. city park, municipal building, public area of police station, city-owned community center, etc). The applicable statute is as follows:
Sec. 411.209. WRONGFUL EXCLUSION OF HANDGUN LICENSE HOLDER. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (i), a state agency or a political subdivision of the state may not provide notice by a communication described by Section 30.06, Penal Code, or by any sign expressly referring to that law or to a license to carry a handgun, that a license holder carrying a handgun under the authority of this subchapter is prohibited from entering or remaining on a premises or other place owned or leased by the governmental entity unless license holders are prohibited from carrying a handgun on the premises or other place by Section 46.03 or 46.035, Penal Code.

(b) A state agency or a political subdivision of the state that violates Subsection (a) is liable for a civil penalty of:

(1) not less than $1,000 and not more than $1,500 for the first violation; and

(2) not less than $10,000 and not more than $10,500 for the second or a subsequent violation.

(c) Each day of a continuing violation of Subsection (a) constitutes a separate violation.

(d) A resident of this state or a person licensed to carry a handgun under this subchapter may file a complaint with the attorney general that a state agency or political subdivision is in violation of Subsection (a) if the resident or person provides the agency or subdivision a written notice that describes the violation and specific location of the sign found to be in violation and the agency or subdivision does not cure the violation before the end of the third business day after the date of receiving the written notice. A complaint filed under this subsection must include evidence of the violation and a copy of the written notice.

(e) A civil penalty collected by the attorney general under this section shall be deposited to the credit of the compensation to victims of crime fund established under Subchapter B, Chapter 56, Code of Criminal Procedure.

(f) Before a suit may be brought against a state agency or a political subdivision of the state for a violation of Subsection (a), the attorney general must investigate the complaint to determine whether legal action is warranted. If legal action is warranted, the attorney general must give the chief administrative officer of the agency or political subdivision charged with the violation a written notice that:

(1) describes the violation and specific location of the sign found to be in violation;

(2) states the amount of the proposed penalty for the violation; and

(3) gives the agency or political subdivision 15 days from receipt of the notice to remove the sign and cure the violation to avoid the penalty, unless the agency or political subdivision was found liable by a court for previously violating Subsection (a).

(g) If the attorney general determines that legal action is warranted and that the state agency or political subdivision has not cured the violation within the 15-day period provided by Subsection (f)(3), the attorney general or the appropriate county or district attorney may sue to collect the civil penalty provided by Subsection (b). The attorney general may also file a petition for a writ of mandamus or apply for other appropriate equitable relief. A suit or petition under this subsection may be filed in a district court in Travis County or in a county in which the principal office of the state agency or political subdivision is located. The attorney general may recover reasonable expenses incurred in obtaining relief under this subsection, including court costs, reasonable attorney's fees, investigative costs, witness fees, and deposition costs.

(h) Sovereign immunity to suit is waived and abolished to the extent of liability created by this section.

(i) Subsection (a) does not apply to a written notice provided by a state hospital under Section 552.002, Health and Safety Code.

Added by Acts 2015, 84th Leg., R.S., Ch. 593 (S.B. 273), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2015.

Amended by:

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1143 (H.B. 435), Sec. 5, eff. September 1, 2017.

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1143 (H.B. 435), Sec. 6, eff. September 1, 2017.
Huh. That's weird - it never mentions 30.07, only 30.06.
Never bring a knife to a gun fight.
Carry gun: Springfield XD Tactical .45

User avatar

JustSomeOldGuy
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 10:49 am

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

#1054

Post by JustSomeOldGuy » Sun May 06, 2018 4:04 pm

Huh. That's weird - it never mentions 30.07, only 30.06
Here's a hint why;
Added by Acts 2015, 84th Leg., R.S., Ch. 593 (S.B. 273), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2015.

Amended by:

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1143 (H.B. 435), Sec. 5, eff. September 1, 2017.

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1143 (H.B. 435), Sec. 6, eff. September 1, 2017.
member of the church of San Gabriel de Possenti
lay brother in the order of St. John Moses Browning
USPSA limited/single stack/revolver

User avatar

spectre
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 243
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:44 am

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

#1055

Post by spectre » Sun May 06, 2018 5:25 pm

JustSomeOldGuy wrote:
Huh. That's weird - it never mentions 30.07, only 30.06
Here's a hint why;
Added by Acts 2015, 84th Leg., R.S., Ch. 593 (S.B. 273), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2015.

Amended by:

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1143 (H.B. 435), Sec. 5, eff. September 1, 2017.

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1143 (H.B. 435), Sec. 6, eff. September 1, 2017.
:iagree: Also, there's not much point in adding open carry when enforcement is nearly nonexistant for improperly posted 30.06 signs. Now, if the law was changed to allow each affected LTC to individually bring suit against offenders in small claims court, for civil rights violations, I bet the signs would come down a lot quicker. Can you imagine the effect of even a few hundred Harris County residents each bringing a separate $1000 suit against a local offender? :evil2:
When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society,
over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it
and a moral code that glorifies it. - Frédéric Bastiat


Odinvalknir
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2018 11:06 am

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

#1056

Post by Odinvalknir » Sun May 06, 2018 7:00 pm

Ah ok, so the thread is covering city government buildings. I Wasn't sure if it was government or just random places around the city.


Thanks for clearing that up. I don't go to many city buildings so I've never really thought about it.

Post Reply

Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”