Legal Signs (enforceable signs for CHLers)

[03Lightningrocks]

I don't think the confusion comes from a lack of knowledge or from not having paid attention in class. I think you have to remember that most people who get a CHL have been law-abiding citizens all their life. They've gone about their lives avoiding activities that could put them in questionable positions or situations. The idea of having to worry about what they do, because it could get them arrested and jailed, is foreign to them. There are any number of ways that carrying a gun can get you in trouble with the law, not least missing a properly formatted sign or ignoring an improperly formatted sign only to be "outed" like Erik Scott was, to tragic consequences. They aren't used to having to examine everything they do to remain legal, to question every move they make. So, they err on the side of caution and ask when they're not comfortable that they are certain. They're looking for confirmation of what they know to be true in an attempt to feel more comfortable that they are making the right decisions and they aren't going to get in trouble with the law.

[O6nop]

Just a couple things to add to the word interpretation... I've read on here, somewhere, that if an improper sign were to be posted, such as a 51% sign at a liquor store (on premise consumption clause), that TABC could be notified and the owner forced to remove the sign. Wouldn't the proper terminology then, be 'illegal' ?

Secondly, I was told at my renewal class something I didn't know or remember from before. Signs such as the one shown in the OP is for unlicensed carry, obviously, so it would not be proper to put a 30.06 sign up at the same location as they would be contradictory. It was instructed to us that the OP's sign example actually authorizes legal concealed carry and a 30.06 would contradict that so it can not be posted. So, depending on how you treat my first statement, a properly created 30.06 sign would be invalid/unenforceable or illegal.

[Keith B]

Secondly, I was told at my renewal class something I didn't know or remember from before. Signs such as the one shown in the OP is for unlicensed carry, obviously, so it would not be proper to put a 30.06 sign up at the same location as they would be contradictory. It was instructed to us that the OP's sign example actually authorizes legal concealed carry and a 30.06 would contradict that so it can not be posted. So, depending on how you treat my first statement, a properly created 30.06 sign would be invalid/unenforceable or illegal.

I have heard this argument before, but IMO it is wrong. The Unlicensed Possession sign does not AUTHORIZE concealed carry, only states that it is illegal to carry on the premise unless you are licensed. If the owner decides they don't want people carrying, and places a 30.06, then it follows the statutes and trumps any authority to concealed carry granted by the license.

[O6nop]

Secondly, I was told at my renewal class something I didn't know or remember from before. Signs such as the one shown in the OP is for unlicensed carry, obviously, so it would not be proper to put a 30.06 sign up at the same location as they would be contradictory. It was instructed to us that the OP's sign example actually authorizes legal concealed carry and a 30.06 would contradict that so it can not be posted. So, depending on how you treat my first statement, a properly created 30.06 sign would be invalid/unenforceable or illegal.

I have heard this argument before, but IMO it is wrong. The Unlicensed Possession sign does not AUTHORIZE concealed carry, only states that it is illegal to carry on the premise unless you are licensed. If the owner decides they don't want people carrying, and places a 30.06, then it follows the statutes and trumps any authority to concealed carry granted by the license.

Thanks, but I couldn't really argue with my instructor during class, especially if I didn't have facts to back it up. Besides, he said he actually notified TABC and had them take them down.
So anyway, that makes some of the accusations about (not) listening in class a little improper. Some instructors cover things that others don't or instill there own opinions as opposed to facts. I wholly support the idea of asking questions, dumb or not, in this forum if you're not sure. It helps to do some research or provide examples, first.

(Clarification edit)

[Hoi Polloi]

I have heard this argument before, but IMO it is wrong. The Unlicensed Possession sign does not AUTHORIZE concealed carry, only states that it is illegal to carry on the premise unless you are licensed. If the owner decides they don't want people carrying, and places a 30.06, then it follows the statutes and trumps any authority to concealed carry granted by the license.

I don't believe the part I marked as red is accurate. I believe the signs states that it is illegal to carry a handgun on the premises by a person not licensed to carry handguns. It only addresses non-licensed people and tells them they can't carry there. It has no bearing on CHL holders, either directly or by implication.

In my opinion, a valid 30.06 sign could be posted right beside it to say that those with a license can't carry there, either. It doesn't "trump" anything by posting it because the first sign is a different topic.

[bdickens]

These threads have me wondering: don't they cover this stuff in the class any more?

[O6nop]

I have heard this argument before, but IMO it is wrong. The Unlicensed Possession sign does not AUTHORIZE concealed carry, only states that it is illegal to carry on the premise unless you are licensed. If the owner decides they don't want people carrying, and places a 30.06, then it follows the statutes and trumps any authority to concealed carry granted by the license.

I don't believe the part I marked as red is accurate. I believe the signs states that it is illegal to carry a handgun on the premises by a person not licensed to carry handguns. It only addresses non-licensed people and tells them they can't carry there. It has no bearing on CHL holders, either directly or by implication.
In my opinion, a valid 30.06 sign could be posted right beside it to say that those with a license can't carry there, either. It doesn't "trump" anything by posting it because the first sign is a different topic.

(Reference red highlight in Hoi's post)
Sure it does, "Unlicensed" would refer to what if not CHL??? That's an implication that it IS legal if you ARE licensed. The question is the implication of "Unless Otherwise Specified" as in the 30.06. Doesn't it go without saying that carrying illegally concealed weapons is already illegal? To me, the sign is actually implying you must be licensed to come in with a concealed handgun. (So maybe I don't totally agree with Keith )

(had to edit this post too)

[pbwalker]

These threads have me wondering: don't they cover this stuff in the class any more?

[O6nop]

These threads have me wondering: don't they cover this stuff in the class any more?

Yes, every five years...

And, it depends on what you mean by "this stuff".
As far as my posts, I said it WAS covered in my renewal class, but it is a mere interpretaion and would depend on what authority you talk to as to get a precise answer.
What was said in your class about the OP's example?

[Keith B]

I have heard this argument before, but IMO it is wrong. The Unlicensed Possession sign does not AUTHORIZE concealed carry, only states that it is illegal to carry on the premise unless you are licensed. If the owner decides they don't want people carrying, and places a 30.06, then it follows the statutes and trumps any authority to concealed carry granted by the license.

I don't believe the part I marked as red is accurate. I believe the signs states that it is illegal to carry a handgun on the premises by a person not licensed to carry handguns. It only addresses non-licensed people and tells them they can't carry there. It has no bearing on CHL holders, either directly or by implication.

In my opinion, a valid 30.06 sign could be posted right beside it to say that those with a license can't carry there, either. It doesn't "trump" anything by posting it because the first sign is a different topic.

Sorry, that was a typo. Should have read 'if you are NOT licensed

Edit to add: And, I agree it only applies to those with no license and means nothing to those who are.

[Hoi Polloi]

I have heard this argument before, but IMO it is wrong. The Unlicensed Possession sign does not AUTHORIZE concealed carry, only states that it is illegal to carry on the premise unless you are licensed. If the owner decides they don't want people carrying, and places a 30.06, then it follows the statutes and trumps any authority to concealed carry granted by the license.

I don't believe the part I marked as red is accurate. I believe the signs states that it is illegal to carry a handgun on the premises by a person not licensed to carry handguns. It only addresses non-licensed people and tells them they can't carry there. It has no bearing on CHL holders, either directly or by implication.

In my opinion, a valid 30.06 sign could be posted right beside it to say that those with a license can't carry there, either. It doesn't "trump" anything by posting it because the first sign is a different topic.

Sorry, that was a typo. Should have read 'if you are NOT licensed

Edit to add: And, I agree it only applies to those with no license and means nothing to those who are.

[3dfxMM]

I have heard this argument before, but IMO it is wrong. The Unlicensed Possession sign does not AUTHORIZE concealed carry, only states that it is illegal to carry on the premise unless you are licensed. If the owner decides they don't want people carrying, and places a 30.06, then it follows the statutes and trumps any authority to concealed carry granted by the license.

I don't believe the part I marked as red is accurate. I believe the signs states that it is illegal to carry a handgun on the premises by a person not licensed to carry handguns. It only addresses non-licensed people and tells them they can't carry there. It has no bearing on CHL holders, either directly or by implication.
In my opinion, a valid 30.06 sign could be posted right beside it to say that those with a license can't carry there, either. It doesn't "trump" anything by posting it because the first sign is a different topic.

(Reference red highlight in Hoi's post)
Sure it does, "Unlicensed" would refer to what if not CHL??? That's an implication that it IS legal if you ARE licensed. The question is the implication of "Unless Otherwise Specified" as in the 30.06. Doesn't it go without saying that carrying illegally concealed weapons is already illegal? To me, the sign is actually implying you must be licensed to come in with a concealed handgun. (So maybe I don't totally agree with Keith )

(had to edit this post too)

The "unlicensed" sign is directed at those who are carrying illegally, which is a misdemeanor (Class A, I believe). In establishments that sell alcohol, that same crime becomes a felony, hence the need for the sign.

[O6nop]

The "unlicensed" sign is directed at those who are carrying illegally, which is a misdemeanor (Class A, I believe). In establishments that sell alcohol, that same crime becomes a felony, hence the need for the sign.

That makes sense, thanks.
So, my instructor was wrong... (?)
Good thing we have this forum to ask questions and clear things up!

[Texas Size 11]

I sat through the class and have read the PC. I feel I know what signs are legal and do not need to ask. However, I think we should all give those that are unclear a break. Personally, I am glad that there are lots of questions. The more informed the CHL holders are, the less chance one will make a mistake and become the poster child of the Brady Campaign.

The purpose of this forum is for people to learn and share information. There are many beginners out there that want to make sure they get it right. There is a lot of info in the class, so it is easy to get a bit confused. My mom, dad, teachers, clergy and friends all say that the only bad question is the one not asked.

If you don't want to deal with the threads then don't click on them. Seems pretty simple to me.

[pbwalker]

I sat through the class and have read the PC. I feel I know what signs are legal and do not need to ask. However, I think we should all give those that are unclear a break. Personally, I am glad that there are lots of questions. The more informed the CHL holders are, the less chance one will make a mistake and become the poster child of the Brady Campaign.

The purpose of this forum is for people to learn and share information. There are many beginners out there that want to make sure they get it right. There is a lot of info in the class, so it is easy to get a bit confused. My mom, dad, teachers, clergy and friends all say that the only bad question is the one not asked.

If you don't want to deal with the threads then don't click on them. Seems pretty simple to me.

Thanks for the insight!

But one question...who said to not ask questions? Who's complaining about the questions? The original question was to figure out where the confusion lies. baldeagle, IMO, had the best response so far. He/She understood the basis of the question and provided a insightful response.

Or is it that some people just need to feel victimized / champion a cause if they feel a topic disagrees with their thoughts / beliefs?