Carry Past Invalid Sign or Not?

[TomV]

A gun buster sign means nothing. If a sign is close to right for 30.06 but has something a little wrong (3/4" letters as opposed to 1" letters) I'll abide by the owners wishes and go elsewhere.

This is me too.

[mr1337]

My favorite was one that was posted on some mom & pop burger joint IIRC. This was in 2004 and I had just started carrying, and did not have a cell phone with a camera yet... The "sign" was on a 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper, in big bold letters:

51

No 30.06 Guns!

51


So... should I have "honored the owner's wishes" or not?

I went with: Not.

Besides... I was carrying a .40 cal, not a .30-06.

I wonder what he has against 30-06?

That story is just too funny

[treadlightly]

51

No 30.06 Guns!

51

I think he left out a semicolon. Pretty sure that must be the case. Nobody in his right mind would oppose guns.

51

No 30.06; Guns!

51

The semicolon makes the most sense. I think there's an extra tax if you use a full colon.

[WLB]

Why would I want to support a business that tries to deny my freedom? I would rather go to their competitor.

[mojo84]

Why would I want to support a business that tries to deny my freedom? I would rather go to their competitor.

That's great if you have a competitor nearby and priced competitively. Not everything is black and white.

If you are in an ambulance being transported to the nearest medical center, are you going to demand they take you elsewhere? It's not always so black and white.

[AJSully421]

51

No 30.06 Guns!

51

I think he left out a semicolon. Pretty sure that must be the case. Nobody in his right mind would oppose guns.

51

No 30.06; Guns!

51

The semicolon makes the most sense. I think there's an extra tax if you use a full colon.

The point was that this person CLEARLY did not know anything about the law, and probably heard somewhere that if he had a red 51 and "30.06" posted on a sign, he was good to go to exclude all gun carriers, including criminals. Seems like he took it upon himself to add the No Guns! part on his own and just tossed the 30.06 part in the middle for extra emphasis.

I'd love to go sit down with that guy and ask him what he thought all of that meant... just to hear how stupid his answers were.

[mr1337]

I inadvertently walked past a gunbuster sign today. I was looking at apartments for a friend moving from out of state. While in the office of an apartment complex, I noticed a gunbuster on the window next to the door I walked in. It was about 8.5" x 11" in size, and there were high bushes nearby that made it easy to miss. (I.e. not conspicuous at all)

These circumstances are why 30.06 is far better than letting all "no guns" signs hold force of law.

Needless to say, I mentioned the "no guns" sign at the apartment office to my friend, and he chose not to lease there. I know it wouldn't apply to the units themselves, but it's nice to know where the management stands on the issue.

[Glockster]

Why would I want to support a business that tries to deny my freedom? I would rather go to their competitor.

I'm just going to say it because apparently this is the thread for this discussion. The above is exactly why I question why someone would go into a place with a sign that is "almost" legal as it seems to me that their intent was clear correct signage or not - they do not want my money. Sure, perhaps the signage isn't correct...but they're still sending the message that I'm not welcome. And for that reason I would simply rather go elsewhere.

[ScottDLS]

Good discussion CHLers. My opinion on this is that I do my level best to follow the law. If a property owner doesn't take the care to properly post 30.06, then my guess is they really don't care that much about CHL. If they really were that concerned then assume they would have taken the time to understand the posting requirements. I really don't care about their "intent", they may have intent to ban gum chewers...but not my responsibility to figure out their wishes. I carry past "invalid" signs. Because it is not a crime. Am I worrying about "taking the ride"? Nope, cuz that's why I "conceal" and carry. If we get open carry in 2016 I will probably try it out a few times as concealment limits my options...I don't want to wear 5" bigger trousers to wear my 92FS...

I carry a PPK like James Bond. I can drill a bad guy at 100m with a head shot due to my outstanding skills . No, I really would like to carry my 92FS in a holster, probably at 4 o'clock. Guess would be "semi" concealed.

[C-dub]

One other thing to consider is the possibility that the business owner has been lied to or convinced that they need a gunbuster sign to comply with their insurance carrier or some city ordinance. The business owner may/probably know nothing about CHL laws.

[troglodyte]

I have long given up trying to guess someone's intent. If it is not valid then conceal and carry on.

[Distinguished Rick]

The statute is very clear on the sign requirements. If a company or individual doesnt want guns in their place of business then post the correct sign. it takes just as much time to do it right as it does to do it wrong. I follow the law to the letter like most people but not if it isnt correct.

[WLB]

Why would I want to support a business that tries to deny my freedom? I would rather go to their competitor.

That's great if you have a competitor nearby and priced competitively. Not everything is black and white.

If you are in an ambulance being transported to the nearest medical center, are you going to demand they take you elsewhere? It's not always so black and white.

I am new and have only recently been looking for signs and checking websites that list places that have them posted. What I have seen so far around here there are very few posted so spending my money where it is welcome is no problem.
Besides, I like that owners of buinesses rights are respected whether I agree with them about what they do with their property or not. It's their property. Also going into a non posted place I figure there are other good guys around and bad guys know that
too.

[Ruark]

If it's a CLEARLY invalid sign (e.g. the gun with a red diagonal stripe across it), I'll carry. But if it's close to valid - say a perfect sign but the letters aren't quite 1" tall, I'll disarm, as much as I hate to do it, or, if it's feasible, just go somewhere else.

The reason is simple: I can't afford to get arrested, cuffed, taken downtown and thrown in jail, pay a bail bondsman $500 to get out, retrieve my car from impoundment, and pay a lawyer $300 an hour to clean up the mess, calm down my hysterical wife (who missed her dental appointment), etc. etc. etc. I fully respect those who are willing to stand up for their principles, but for many of us, these are not trivial issues, when you can just leave the gun in the car and not worry about it.

[sugar land dave]

I live in the Houston area. A person in this area should definitely worry about it when forced to disarm. Parking lots are prime crime areas here. A person sliding up close to ask you the time might be pulling a knife while you glance down at your watch.