TexasCHLforum.com

WildBill wrote:

sugar land dave wrote:Several places I have seen in various Texas cities have been posting 30.06 signs at shoe level. Some have been of legal size and language, others have been printed out on 8 1/2 x 11 copy paper. Does anybody have thoughts on if this is a conspicuous 30.06 posting.

My thought is that if you saw the sign then it is conspicous. If the DA really wanted to press charges, he would do so.

If that's the standard, then it makes it alot easier. Does that mean I can stop going out of my way to look for signs, and just assume that its not conspicuous if I didn't see it upon entering as a normal and rationale person would (not crawling on the floor, looking behind planters, or staring at deeply tinted glass)?

Katygunnut wrote:

WildBill wrote:

sugar land dave wrote:Several places I have seen in various Texas cities have been posting 30.06 signs at shoe level. Some have been of legal size and language, others have been printed out on 8 1/2 x 11 copy paper. Does anybody have thoughts on if this is a conspicuous 30.06 posting.

My thought is that if you saw the sign then it is conspicous. If the DA really wanted to press charges, he would do so.

If that's the standard, then it makes it alot easier. Does that mean I can stop going out of my way to look for signs, and just assume that its not conspicuous if I didn't see it upon entering as a normal and rationale person would (not crawling on the floor, looking behind planters, or staring at deeply tinted glass)?

IANAL so I can't say that it's the standard or not. I am just trying to be a "reasonable person."

They only apply to people wearing ankle holsters.

Barbi Q wrote:They only apply to people wearing ankle holsters.

Or maybe those carrying "Mouse Guns"?

WildBill wrote:

MoJo wrote:

WildBill wrote:My thought is that if you saw the sign then it is conspicous. If the DA really wanted to press charges, he would do so.

The ones that may not meet being conspicuous are the signs behind super dark tinted glass and obscured by plants etc. If you see it - - - it applies to you - - - providing all other criteria are met.

I agree. My point is that it would be hard for a person to say he should not be charged because he saw the sign, but another people may not have seen it.

....and I would not carry if there is any possibility of the sign meeting legal standings. 1" block letters with the correct language, even if I find it behind a planter, I will honor. If the letters are in italics and 1/2", I will honor that too. Something off the printer, with 1/4" letters, at shoe level, not posted on every door, tattered, smudged......

Now, what if the sign is not even close to the legal requirement? What if you buy your ticket and written notice is on the back of the ticket? I know what I would do at that point. Excuse myself for something I forgot in the car.

My point in all this is that each has to know what is legal, what is not, and to what degree you are willing to go to protect your state-given rights.

WildBill wrote:

Katygunnut wrote:

WildBill wrote:

sugar land dave wrote:Several places I have seen in various Texas cities have been posting 30.06 signs at shoe level. Some have been of legal size and language, others have been printed out on 8 1/2 x 11 copy paper. Does anybody have thoughts on if this is a conspicuous 30.06 posting.

My thought is that if you saw the sign then it is conspicous. If the DA really wanted to press charges, he would do so.

If that's the standard, then it makes it alot easier. Does that mean I can stop going out of my way to look for signs, and just assume that its not conspicuous if I didn't see it upon entering as a normal and rationale person would (not crawling on the floor, looking behind planters, or staring at deeply tinted glass)?

IANAL so I can't say that it's the standard or not. I am just trying to be a "reasonable person."

I know. I was being a little tongue in cheek. Something tells me that an overly aggressive DA would not be consistent both ways in interpreting the same standard.

Katygunnut wrote:I know. I was being a little tongue in cheek. Something tells me that an overly aggressive DA would not be consistent both ways in interpreting the same standard.

I don't think that either of us wants to personally find that out.

WildBill wrote:

Katygunnut wrote:I know. I was being a little tongue in cheek. Something tells me that an overly aggressive DA would not be consistent both ways in interpreting the same standard.

I don't think that either of us wants to personally find that out.

Katygunnut wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Katygunnut wrote:I know. I was being a little tongue in cheek. Something tells me that an overly aggressive DA would not be consistent both ways in interpreting the same standard.

I don't think that either of us wants to personally find that out.

Also, I think that anybody who is crawling into a building at "Shoe Level" shouldn't be carrying anyway.

WildBill wrote:

Katygunnut wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Katygunnut wrote:I know. I was being a little tongue in cheek. Something tells me that an overly aggressive DA would not be consistent both ways in interpreting the same standard.

I don't think that either of us wants to personally find that out.

Also, I think that anybody who is crawling into a building at "Shoe Level" shouldn't be carrying anyway.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

That's really mean! I miss Hervé Villechaize. Tatoo: "The Plane!, The Plane!"

WildBill wrote:Also, I think that anybody who is crawling into a building at "Shoe Level" shouldn't be carrying anyway.

I agree, which is why I walked into the place and visited with the Constable. If I was discovered, my bet was that the LEO I was chatting with would be my official point of contact with the authorities. That would be one of the few times that it would be better to be asked to leave, rather than invited for a visit.

WildBill wrote:That's really mean! I miss Hervé Villechaize. Tatoo: "The Plane!, The Plane!"

LOL... I never missed an episode. I am getting old!

sjfcontrol wrote:

Crossfire wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:It's referred to as the "Weiner-dog sign". If you're taller than a weiner-dog, you can't see it!

Hey, hey, hey! That's MY line! I am gonna have to start collecting royalties on that!

You'll just have to respond quicker!

I have a weiner-dog too, ya'know

Yeah, but mine's cuter!

Crossfire wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

Crossfire wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:It's referred to as the "Weiner-dog sign". If you're taller than a weiner-dog, you can't see it!

Hey, hey, hey! That's MY line! I am gonna have to start collecting royalties on that!

You'll just have to respond quicker!

I have a weiner-dog too, ya'know

Yeah, but mine's cuter!

You're prejudiced. Perhaps we should post some pictures and let the members decide?