The way I read this, if one has "effective consent", it does not matter that other notice (e.g., the sign) was given. Do you read this the same way?PC §30.06. wrote:PC §30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
If so, I would presume that one would want to get this "effective consent" from the establishment in writing just to avoid any problems.
What do you think?