CBS 11 just announced

[baldeagle]

They're covering 30.06 signs. Advertising it as "some chl holders believe they can ignore these guns not allowed signs" and they're right.

{{sigh}} Thanks a LOT, OCT.

[Vol Texan]

They're covering 30.06 signs. Advertising it as "some chl holders believe they can ignore these guns not allowed signs" and they're right.

{{sigh}} Thanks a LOT, OCT.

Do you have a link for us to see this announcement?

[Charles L. Cotton]

They're covering 30.06 signs. Advertising it as "some chl holders believe they can ignore these guns not allowed signs" and they're right.

{{sigh}} Thanks a LOT, OCT.

Yep! Yet they'll claim they're protecting our rights and that their demonstrations don't have any downside.

Chas.

[baldeagle]

It was on tonight's 10PM news show. They discussed the 30.06 signs and MDA's attempts to weaken the law so it would be easier for businesses to keep CHL holders out. I doubt they'll be successful with the current makeup of the legislature, but we all know they won't stop agitating to disarm us all. They want us to be like the Europeans - helpless in the face of terrorists with automatic weapons.

[patterson]

went to website and video was unavailable

[The Annoyed Man]

OCT is made up of retarded children, and their leadership exist in a moral vacuum.

[TomV]

Unless you have seen the video, I don't understand why OCT is getting the blame for this. I don't like OCT any more than most on here, but what have they done?

From the OP, it sounds more to me like those who challenge just about every 30.06 sign they see. If one word is wrong, or it's an 1/8" of an inch off in font size, I have seen posters say they will ignore they sign. I really don't agree with that attitude either, but that's just me.

[baldeagle]

Unless you have seen the video, I don't understand why OCT is getting the blame for this. I don't like OCT any more than most on here, but what have they done?

I watched the news, so yes, I've seen the video. You might want to read this thread to catch up. http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=94&t=73533" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From the OP, it sounds more to me like those who challenge just about every 30.06 sign they see. If one word is wrong, or it's an 1/8" of an inch off in font size, I have seen posters say they will ignore they sign. I really don't agree with that attitude either, but that's just me.

The law is very clear. Unless you post a 30.06 compliant sign, the sign has no effect on CHL holders. If you personally choose to honor every invalid sign, that is your right. But those who choose to ignore the signs are both legally and morally correct. MDA (Moms Demand Action) and CSGV are trying to weaken the law so that any kind of sign posted anywhere on the premises is sufficient. They're doing that because OCT brought attention to the signs. That's reality. http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/ope ... gn-me.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

None of these signs are compliant with Texas law. http://www.compliancesigns.com/no-weapo ... aQodLAsA-Q" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; So a CHL holder is following the law when they walk past such a sign and ignore it. The law was written that way on purpose, to address exactly that type of situation.

When you see a sign that says "The unlicensed possession of a weapon on these premises is a felony with a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment and a fine not to exceed $10,000." what does that mean to you? To me it means the licensed possession of a weapon is not a felony. IOW, come on in, pardner.

Many businesses post these types of signs because they know it placates the sheep while still honoring our right to carry. By drawing attention to the signs and the law, OCT may have placed some businesses in the uncomfortable position of having to take a public stand on CHL. For example, due to OCT's actions, Kroger has been targeted by MDA and Starbucks and Chipotle have publicly stated that they prefer that you leave your guns at home. (This, of course, does not have the force of law, so you are perfectly free to go into their stores armed.) If enough fuss is made about it, they may start posting 30.06 signs.

OCT is directly to blame for that. When they began walking into businesses armed with rifles, people began pointing to non-compliant signs and saying why aren't they being arrested?

[RPBrown]

Here is the link but I could not get it to play for some reason:

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/video?autoStart ... d=11014259" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TomV]

None of these signs are compliant with Texas law. http://www.compliancesigns.com/no-weapo ... aQodLAsA-Q" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; So a CHL holder is following the law when they walk past such a sign and ignore it. The law was written that way on purpose, to address exactly that type of situation.

I understand that. I know none of those are proper signs. No issues there.

When you see a sign that says "The unlicensed possession of a weapon on these premises is a felony with a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment and a fine not to exceed $10,000." what does that mean to you? To me it means the licensed possession of a weapon is not a felony. IOW, come on in, pardner.

Yes, that sign is required by TABC if a facility sells alcohol, but is under 51%. I will carry right past that sign as well.

Starbucks and Chipotle, as you stated, requested people to leave their guns at home. They have not posted 30.06 signs, and I really don't think they will. I think they realize it will cost them business and that is counter productive to their end goals.

[Crossfire]

Here is the link to the video: http://dfw.cbslocal.com/video/11014259- ... ns-change/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Keith B]

This was a Mom's Demand Action hit, no mention of OCT in the video link posted by Crossfire.

The one they says is missing the Spanish is the Blue 'Unlicensed Possession' sign from TABC. It's not even a 30.06 and the TABC sign doesn't require the second language unless directed by the TABC. The Chucky Cheese sign is a generic sign and tried to mention the 'Unlicensed Possession' language.

Bottom line, this is kinda old news as MDA has been at this for awhile now. However, you can bet they are contacting legislators to try and get someone to make modifications to the current 30.06 language and/or sign requirements.

[jimlongley]

When you see a sign that says "The unlicensed possession of a weapon on these premises is a felony with a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment and a fine not to exceed $10,000." what does that mean to you? To me it means the licensed possession of a weapon is not a felony. IOW, come on in, pardner.

Many businesses post these types of signs because they know it placates the sheep while still honoring our right to carry. By drawing attention to the signs and the law, OCT may have placed some businesses in the uncomfortable position of having to take a public stand on CHL. For example, due to OCT's actions, Kroger has been targeted by MDA and Starbucks and Chipotle have publicly stated that they prefer that you leave your guns at home. (This, of course, does not have the force of law, so you are perfectly free to go into their stores armed.) If enough fuss is made about it, they may start posting 30.06 signs.

OCT is directly to blame for that. When they began walking into businesses armed with rifles, people began pointing to non-compliant signs and saying why aren't they being arrested?

I have yet to see a business that was not required by TABC to post the "unlicensed possession" sign do so. The sign means that alcohol is being sold, not for consumption on premises, by that business, and that it is legal for a CHL holder to carry there under the authority of their CHL, but it is a felony for anyone else to carry there. You won't see that sign on a business that sells for consumption on premises, nor will you see that sign on a business that does not sell alcohol, it is a TABC sign, not a CHL sign.

I still do not see a direct connection between the 30.06 sign and OCT. While I am in favor of Open Carry, I am not a member of OCT and do not necessarily agree with their tactics. But the correct response to anyone pointing at a 30.06 sign, compliant with the law or not, and asking why someone open carrying a long gun is not being arrested is that the sign does not relate to anything other than concealed carry by a CHL holder, and that's all. If a business wants to prevent someone from open carrying on their premises, all they need to do is put up a no guns allowed sign of some sort, and that will suffice, except for concealed carry by a CHL holder.

I have not observed any of the businesses that have been "patronized" by OCT putting up any kind of no guns signage, or 30.06 signs and I think that although OCT might have caused a thought or two along the lines of preventing carry here and there, they are being held responsible by many for something that should more properly be laid at the feet of Bloomberg and co. Nor have I seen any business that upgraded their signage attribute that to OCT.

I think that this is correlation without causation and a lot of the bashing of OCT is unwarranted, and it just sounds an awful lot like the bashing that the NRA gets.

[Keith B]

I have yet to see a business that was not required by TABC to post the "unlicensed possession" sign do so. The sign means that alcohol is being sold, not for consumption on premises, by that business, and that it is legal for a CHL holder to carry there under the authority of their CHL, but it is a felony for anyone else to carry there. You won't see that sign on a business that sells for consumption on premises, nor will you see that sign on a business that does not sell alcohol, it is a TABC sign, not a CHL sign.

Just a correction, these are also required to be posted at businesses that make less than 51% of their revenue from on-premise consumption sales. Any restaurant that serves alcohol is required to post them. If they sell alcohol at all, then they must post either the blue 'Unlicensed possession sign OR the 51% red sign, as determined by their license.

[SherwoodForest]

It requires no gift for imaginative genius to realize that the strategy of reducing the number of "welcome Mats" for armed citizens translates to more guns left at home or in the parking lot....like the situation at that Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen 2 decades back.

Perhaps the MDA nags don't see themselves or their loved ones ever being victims of something like a massacre in a restaurant.

Moms on the payroll of Bloomberg might just owe their lives someday to a CHL holder ...... who is able to stop some home-grown jihadist before he interrupts THEIR brunch.

Something for the Bloomberg nags lurking on this forum to think about.