Concealed Rifle Carry passed this sign?

[NotRPB]

Oh my what a dilemma

If there's a "no shirt no shoes" sign along with a "No weapons" sign, what do I do about really pointy-tipped cowboy boots?

What about a metal belt buckle which I understand has been used as a weapon before.
All pocket knives and ink pens must be left outside of hospitals?

If it isn't specific, I have no idea what they mean, and if I see no reference to 30.05 on a no tobacco on premises sign, I don't know if they mean I can carry snuff in my locked car or not ...

I don't carry a handgun where it would break the law posted on the signs.

If it isn't specific, I have no idea what they mean.

[ScottDLS]

Okay guys. I really hate to rain on this parade, but I feel compelled to do so.

You are absolutely correct that 30.06 and 30.07 do not apply to long guns. I agree with you that a picture of a handgun with a slash through it means no handguns, not no weapons period. However, the sign pictured also says "No Weapons" at the top. I have had this conversation several times, and the answer arrived at by people that know a lot more about the law than I do has always been that "No Weapons" carries force of law with regards to long guns per 30.05. I can copy/paste the answer from a firearms attorney if someone doesn't want to take my word for it. I don't think you would be charged with anything regarding the fact that it's a hospital, as I believe the hospital restrictions in 46.035 only apply to handguns in a posted hospital. The 30.05 violation would be a class A misdemeanor. I know this isn't the answer any of us want, but I feel I would be remiss if I didn't mention this. Hope this helps you to make informed decisions regarding carry.

Sec. 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS.
(C) a sign or signs posted on the property or at the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;

But they aren't posting signs that we are trespassing are they? They are posting signs that say we are liable to have to put a second mortgage on our homes if we stay more than a day or two. Entry is not forbidden in the case that we are talking about. And I am also not encouraging anyone to CC a long arm past any signs. But I am not sure that your example applies to that situation. As I read what you shared, 30.05 applies to someone entering a property uninvited and/or posted for trespass.

I too wondered about this. The implication being made is that a "No Weapons" sign is the same as a "No Trespassing" sign. How about the "No Smoking" part? If you smoke in the hospital are you now guilty of a class A misdemeanor?
Where are the attorneys?

My argument is NO you are not guilty of a Class B TRESPASSING for smoking even if there is a circle slash cigarette sign. Now you may be guilty of violating a city smoking ordinance, but I don't buy that a pictogram or a generic set of "rules" automatically invoke 30.05. I've never seen this in practice, nor heard of a case to back this up.

And particularly in this case because the "No Weapons" is on the sign as a non-statutory part of the 30.06 notice, it's even more likely to be interpreted to apply to the sign. Also, the 46.02 definition of "weapons" does not include long guns.

[ScottDLS]

But by using your definition of a "no weapons" sign validating a trespassing charge, why is a 30.06 or 30.07 sign required by law in Texas? Just put up a big (or small) gun with a red circle and slash through it. Even carrying a specific handgun past a 30.06 sign is only a class C. You just made it a class A by invoking 30.05 the way that you did. Does 30.05 and your definition trump 30.06 and its penalties?

No, because they make a very specific exception for handgun licensees. I didn't quote the whole law, just the parts I thought were relevant to the discussion. Here is the section that exempts licensed carry and a link to the whole section.

(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was forbidden; and
(2) the person was carrying:
(A) a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a handgun; and
(B) a handgun:
(i) in a concealed manner; or
(ii) in a shoulder or belt holster.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... .htm#30.05

This exemption wasn't added until 2003, but since 1997 30.05 has never been held to prohibit concealed carry.

[LucasMcCain]

Also keep in mind that if someone with apparent authority asks you to leave because of your rifle, you must do so or you will become a trespasser.

This I would agree with, but while CC-ing as the thread describes no one should be asking. And no one should be refusing to leave when asked. But refusing to leave when asked is a separate situation from what we were discussing, I think.

That was part of the quoted answer from the firearms lawyer, not something I added. I just included the entire answer given by the lawyer to the question asked.

[LucasMcCain]

What portion statute makes a person carrying past a 30.06 sign with a concealed long gun a criminal trespasser under 30.05? It may well be there but I have not read it that way.

30.06 only applies to licensed carry of a concealed handgun. It doesn't refer to concealed long guns or 30.05.

Where is a "gun buster" sign defined as notice? Notice is described in a manner to keep people out. I do not see it defined as to how to conditionally keep you out based on things on your person. None of the section '(2) "Notice" means:' parts A-E read that way to me. They describe signage to keep everybody out, IMO.

That's part of the problem. They don't define what specific form notice has to take. They say what constitutes notice in general terms, but not a specific symbol or wording. In many states, a simple "gun buster" sign actually has force of law with regard to licensed carry of handguns. I'm very glad that is not the case in Texas. However, private property owners are allowed to restrict people from carrying long guns on their property. They can legally restrict you from doing so by posting signs. You can be prosecuted for disregarding those signs. If caught, you would be charged under PC 30.05.

Just to be extra clear, I am not in favor of this system. I would much rather be able to carry a gun anywhere I want. I believe "shall not be infringed" should mean exactly that. I carry absolutely any time I am outside of my property and not restricted from doing so by the law, and I encourage anyone who will hold still long enough to listen to me to do the same.

Things precious to me:
1. My God.
2. My girl.
3. My guns.

In that order.

I just don't want anyone to disobey what really is a poorly worded and vague law and pay for it just because I didn't speak up. Like my sig says, though, IANAL, and I'm fallible just like the rest of humanity. However, the interpretation I offer is that of lawyer, not just me.

[LucasMcCain]

Oh my what a dilemma

If there's a "no shirt no shoes" sign along with a "No weapons" sign, what do I do about really pointy-tipped cowboy boots?

What about a metal belt buckle which I understand has been used as a weapon before.
All pocket knives and ink pens must be left outside of hospitals?

If it isn't specific, I have no idea what they mean, and if I see no reference to 30.05 on a no tobacco on premises sign, I don't know if they mean I can carry snuff in my locked car or not ...

I don't carry a handgun where it would break the law posted on the signs.

If it isn't specific, I have no idea what they mean.

I agree that the term "weapon" is vague, and can be attributed to many mundane objects. However, I really don't see you convincing a jury that a rifle would fall into that gray area of "does this constitute a weapon?"

[LucasMcCain]

My argument is NO you are not guilty of a Class B TRESPASSING for smoking even if there is a circle slash cigarette sign. Now you may be guilty of violating a city smoking ordinance, but I don't buy that a pictogram or a generic set of "rules" automatically invoke 30.05. I've never seen this in practice, nor heard of a case to back this up.

And particularly in this case because the "No Weapons" is on the sign as a non-statutory part of the 30.06 notice, it's even more likely to be interpreted to apply to the sign. Also, the 46.02 definition of "weapons" does not include long guns.

I have no idea about the smoking thing. I guess that may be slightly different because it is an act you can engage in after entering? I'm really not sure.

I agree that the fact that the "No Weapons" part is on the 30.06 sign complicates things a little. As far as 46.02 goes, I agree that you should not be charged with unlawful carry of a weapon, as that section only references handguns.

ETA: One of the local YMCAs avoided that ambiguity by posting compliant 30.06 and 30.07 signs, and posting a separate "No Firearms" sign next to them.

[LucasMcCain]

But by using your definition of a "no weapons" sign validating a trespassing charge, why is a 30.06 or 30.07 sign required by law in Texas? Just put up a big (or small) gun with a red circle and slash through it. Even carrying a specific handgun past a 30.06 sign is only a class C. You just made it a class A by invoking 30.05 the way that you did. Does 30.05 and your definition trump 30.06 and its penalties?

No, because they make a very specific exception for handgun licensees. I didn't quote the whole law, just the parts I thought were relevant to the discussion. Here is the section that exempts licensed carry and a link to the whole section.

(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was forbidden; and
(2) the person was carrying:
(A) a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a handgun; and
(B) a handgun:
(i) in a concealed manner; or
(ii) in a shoulder or belt holster.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... .htm#30.05

This exemption wasn't added until 2003, but since 1997 30.05 has never been held to prohibit concealed carry.

I'm not sure I understand. For the 6 intervening years, it never came up in a court case? Or it did come up, but 30.05 was ruled as not applying? Please keep in mind I am relatively new to the concealed carry arena, as I have only had my license for about three years. I'm not aware of a lot of the historical stuff. I'm doing my best to educate myself on all things carry related, and this forum has been a great resource for doing so, but I am still learning. I'm hoping a bonafide lawyer will jump in here at some point.

[rotor]

Again, the question is--- is a "No Weapons" sign a valid no trespassing sign if one carries a weapon ( specifically in this case a long-gun) past that sign? I think LucasMcCain is referring to people that go past a "no trespassing sign" and are armed. I don't consider a no weapons sign equivalent to a no trespassing sign. Now if you open carry a long gun and are asked to leave (sign or not) and don't then I believe you are trespassing and can be fined whatever fine is in the law. There are some very specific signs that are used for no trespassing including purple paint on trees but I don't believe a "No Weapons" sign is a No Trespassing sign. I realize that we are not talking LTC here but we are talking about places that one might carry a rifle when a handgun is not allowed. We need an attorney to tell us though and I am not an attorney.

[ScottDLS]

Here's why I don't think a generic pictogram or "no weapons" sign invokes 30.05 for someone carrying a concealed long gun...

The 30.05 Trespass Statute is aimed at people entering property uninvited. Going on your farm, your yard, your buildings without (implicit or explicit) permission. So far as I can tell it has never been held to preclude you from entering a business that is open to the public (during business hours). When the CHL law was passed in 1995, some that were opposed to the law (including the then AG) realized that there was no crime committed by carrying a concealed weapon in a private establishment, regardless of the owner's feelings on guns.

This is what happened in most of the states like Florida that earlier adopted shall issue CC, and even the anti-gun places like New York City where it was nearly impossible to obtain a permit.

So the AG came up with an opinion in 1995 that a business that wanted to prohibit concealed carry could post a sign to that effect and establish a cause to be prosecuted under 30.05. The problem with this was that since 30.05 wasn't designed to prohibit conduct, especially that which was "invisible" to the owner/public, there was no specification as to how the owner should make his intentions known. Hence, the 1 inch pictogram with 4pt type that theoretically makes you prosecutable for ignoring it.

So then in 1997 the 30.06 statute was passed to clear up the confusion and specify exactly the notice that was required to prohibit CC by a license holder. At the time, there was no DEFENSE added to 30.05 because it was intended that 30.06 specify the criminal conduct explicitly.

Now if you hold that 30.05 can be used via a non-specific sign, to enforce class B trespass in a publicly open location, then consider the following signs...

"No cops"
"No Republicans"
"No briefs allowed, only boxers"
"No short hair"

So if Johnny Detective FMPD in plain clothes walks into said business wearing his McCain 2008 t-shirt, briefs (concealed under jeans), and a high and tight while carrying concealed, is he guilty of a class A misdemeanor? Was he from 1995-1997? Is he today?

So why am I guilty, if I walk into Sprouts carrying my concealed MAC10 Machine Gun? Or Keltec 2000?

What's the difference?

[Solaris]

I have used a sub-2000 to carry past 30.06 since 30.06 signs went up last century. Normally Itry to avoid posted places, but some places you need to go so that is how I carry.

[rotor]

Here's why I don't think a generic pictogram or "no weapons" sign invokes 30.05 for someone carrying a concealed long gun...

The 30.05 Trespass Statute is aimed at people entering property uninvited. Going on your farm, your yard, your buildings without (implicit or explicit) permission. So far as I can tell it has never been held to preclude you from entering a business that is open to the public (during business hours). When the CHL law was passed in 1995, some that were opposed to the law (including the then AG) realized that there was no crime committed by carrying a concealed weapon in a private establishment, regardless of the owner's feelings on guns.

This is what happened in most of the states like Florida that earlier adopted shall issue CC, and even the anti-gun places like New York City where it was nearly impossible to obtain a permit.

So the AG came up with an opinion in 1995 that a business that wanted to prohibit concealed carry could post a sign to that effect and establish a cause to be prosecuted under 30.05. The problem with this was that since 30.05 wasn't designed to prohibit conduct, especially that which was "invisible" to the owner/public, there was no specification as to how the owner should make his intentions known. Hence, the 1 inch pictogram with 4pt type that theoretically makes you prosecutable for ignoring it.

So then in 1997 the 30.06 statute was passed to clear up the confusion and specify exactly the notice that was required to prohibit CC by a license holder. At the time, there was no DEFENSE added to 30.05 because it was intended that 30.06 specify the criminal conduct explicitly.

Now if you hold that 30.05 can be used via a non-specific sign, to enforce class B trespass in a publicly open location, then consider the following signs...

"No cops"
"No Republicans"
"No briefs allowed, only boxers"
"No short hair"

So if Johnny Detective FMPD in plain clothes walks into said business wearing his McCain 2008 t-shirt, briefs (concealed under jeans), and a high and tight while carrying concealed, is he guilty of a class A misdemeanor? Was he from 1995-1997? Is he today?

So why am I guilty, if I walk into Sprouts carrying my concealed MAC10 Machine Gun? Or Keltec 2000?

What's the difference?

This sounds very logical.

[goose]

What portion statute makes a person carrying past a 30.06 sign with a concealed long gun a criminal trespasser under 30.05? It may well be there but I have not read it that way.

30.06 only applies to licensed carry of a concealed handgun. It doesn't refer to concealed long guns or 30.05.

We're all pretty good with that. No one has even hinted that 30.06 deals with long guns. You brought in 30.05. What part of any statute makes a person carrying past a 30.06 sign with a concealed long gun a criminal trespasser under 30.05? What words say what you claim?

Where is a "gun buster" sign defined as notice? Notice is described in a manner to keep people out. I do not see it defined as to how to conditionally keep you out based on things on your person. None of the section '(2) "Notice" means:' parts A-E read that way to me. They describe signage to keep everybody out, IMO.

That's part of the problem. They don't define what specific form notice has to take.

But they do. That is what parts A-E of section 30.05, b, 2 define. How you post a property for tresspass. Five definitions of how you post a property.
(2) "Notice" means:
(A) oral or written communication by the owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;
(B) fencing or other enclosure obviously designed to exclude intruders or to contain livestock;
(C) a sign or signs posted on the property or at the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;
(D) the placement of identifying purple paint marks on trees or posts on the property, provided that the marks are:
(i) vertical lines of not less than eight inches in length and not less than one inch in width;
(ii) placed so that the bottom of the mark is not less than three feet from the ground or more than five feet from the ground; and
(iii) placed at locations that are readily visible to any person approaching the property and no more than:
(a) 100 feet apart on forest land; or
(b) 1,000 feet apart on land other than forest land; or
(E) the visible presence on the property of a crop grown for human consumption that is under cultivation, in the process of being harvested, or marketable if harvested at the time of entry.

They say what constitutes notice in general terms, but not a specific symbol or wording. In many states, a simple "gun buster" sign actually has force of law with regard to licensed carry of handguns. I'm very glad that is not the case in Texas. However, private property owners are allowed to restrict people from carrying long guns on their property. They can legally restrict you from doing so by posting signs. You can be prosecuted for disregarding those signs. If caught, you would be charged under PC 30.05.

Where in the Texas statues does it say that? Where in case law has that been shown?

Just to be extra clear, I am not in favor of this system. I would much rather be able to carry a gun anywhere I want. I believe "shall not be infringed" should mean exactly that. I carry absolutely any time I am outside of my property and not restricted from doing so by the law, and I encourage anyone who will hold still long enough to listen to me to do the same.

Things precious to me:
1. My God.
2. My girl.
3. My guns.

In that order.

I just don't want anyone to disobey what really is a poorly worded and vague law and pay for it just because I didn't speak up. Like my sig says, though, IANAL, and I'm fallible just like the rest of humanity. However, the interpretation I offer is that of lawyer, not just me.

And to be clear, six lawyers can all offer six different opinions but until it has seen a day in court, they are all just opinions. Now if we can get a quorum of lawyers that all think the same thing we might be getting close to what we want. I am still missing the statute that describes how a person can be charged with criminal trespass using 30.05, in a business open to the public, without having been asked to leave.

[goose]

This sounds very logical.

Oh, ScottDLS gets a "This sounds logical." But I get a "He is talking about walking past a no trespassing sign." Fine. :-)

[goose]

I don't consider a no weapons sign equivalent to a no trespassing sign. Now if you open carry a long gun and are asked to leave (sign or not) and don't then I believe you are trespassing and can be fined whatever fine is in the law. There are some very specific signs that are used for no trespassing including purple paint on trees but I don't believe a "No Weapons" sign is a No Trespassing sign.

Agreed.