TexasCHLforum.com

I have a question... What constitutes "oral communication"? I mean, concealed is concealed. But allow me a stupid example. Let's say they post someone at the door who says to every person walking in "If you have any legally concealed guns, you're not allow in the premises."

Is that legal oral communication?

This is a hypothetical exercise only, I don't have an example of a business doing this, nor do I think it's likely.

If I identified them as an "official" representative of the business, I would personally acknowledge that as proper oral notice.

I appreciate that, and don't disagree. I'm asking a hypothetical legal question, rather than a personal opinion question... the question is "what does the law say constitutes oral notice?"

I ask because "written notice" is pretty hard line. But "oral notice" is pretty much totally UN-defined.

30.06 doesn't apply guidelines like it does for written notice. Anyone who is the owner or acting on the owners authority you tells you "If you have a concealed weapon you are not allowed to carry here" would be legally binding. IMHO and IANAL.

Purplehood wrote:If I identified them as an "official" representative of the business, I would personally acknowledge that as proper oral notice.

I don't necessarily agree with that because then the Janitor or stock boy could say no guns and it would be enforceable.

(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone
with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written
communication.

flb_78 wrote: I don't necessarily agree with that because then the Janitor or stock boy could say no guns and it would be enforceable.

And that would constitute notification....(provided they are acting at the owners direction). A persons "position" is not a requirement to act as an agent. The notification is being given by proxy, it doesn't matter if the person acting as agent is the manager, the owner, the bartender, or the janitor. If they have been given authority to make notification then its valid.

(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.

Here the question is: How do I KNOW who has "apparent authority"? The answer of course....is you ask them. You sure can't tell by their dress, and shouldn't make assumptions about job positions (I've seen many an owner mopping the floor, or carrying in supplies).

For me, the answer to all this is simple: If you have received oral communication that makes it clear the owners intent (or a person should reasonsably have known his/her intent) then leave your weapon outside, or go somewhere else.

Do not try to slip in under the radar thinking that some small "technicality" makes it O.K.

If you do, then you better hope I am not on any jury that hears the case. I am a firm believer in "policing our own".

flintknapper wrote:

flb_78 wrote: I don't necessarily agree with that because then the Janitor or stock boy could say no guns and it would be enforceable.

And that would constitute notification....(provided they are acting at the owners direction). A persons "position" is not a requirement to act as an agent. The notification is being given by proxy, it doesn't matter if the person acting as agent is the manager, the owner, the bartender, or the janitor. If they have been given authority to make notification then its valid.

(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.

Here the question is: How do I KNOW who has "apparent authority"? The answer of course....is you ask them. You sure can't tell by their dress, and shouldn't make assumptions about job positions (I've seen many an owner mopping the floor, or carrying in supplies).

For me, the answer to all this is simple: If you have received oral communication that makes it clear the owners intent (or a person should reasonsably have known his/her intent) then leave your weapon outside, or go somewhere else.

Do not try to slip in under the radar thinking that some small "technicality" makes it O.K.

If you do, then you better hope I am not on any jury that hears the case. I am a firm believer in "policing our own".

So if Im at WalMart and the stockboy notices a Glock hat on my head and he says, "you can't have a gun here", I would be in violation of the law and if you were on the jury, you'd throw me in jail, even though WalMart does not ban CHLs and I know a fella high up in the security detail and he says that if you EVER see ANY WalMart in any state post a No Guns sign for CHLs, let him know and he'll have it removed?

flb_78 wrote:

flintknapper wrote:

flb_78 wrote: I don't necessarily agree with that because then the Janitor or stock boy could say no guns and it would be enforceable.

And that would constitute notification....(provided they are acting at the owners direction). A persons "position" is not a requirement to act as an agent. The notification is being given by proxy, it doesn't matter if the person acting as agent is the manager, the owner, the bartender, or the janitor. If they have been given authority to make notification then its valid.

(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.

Here the question is: How do I KNOW who has "apparent authority"? The answer of course....is you ask them. You sure can't tell by their dress, and shouldn't make assumptions about job positions (I've seen many an owner mopping the floor, or carrying in supplies).

For me, the answer to all this is simple: If you have received oral communication that makes it clear the owners intent (or a person should reasonably have known his/her intent) then leave your weapon outside, or go somewhere else.

Do not try to slip in under the radar thinking that some small "technicality" makes it O.K.

If you do, then you better hope I am not on any jury that hears the case. I am a firm believer in "policing our own".

So if Im at WalMart and the stockboy notices a Glock hat on my head and he says, "you can't have a gun here", I would be in violation of the law and if you were on the jury, you'd throw me in jail, even though WalMart does not ban CHLs and I know a fella high up in the security detail and he says that if you EVER see ANY WalMart in any state post a No Guns sign for CHLs, let him know and he'll have it removed?

No Sir, I was careful in my reply to say someone "acting at the owners direction". So, if you question the stockboy's authority to give notification...you should ask for confirmation. If it turns out the "stockboy" indeed has that authority...then you would do well to heed it.

The point in my previous post (perhaps not well made)...is that ANYONE (acting as agent) can tell you the companies policy/wishes...and it would be binding.

If YOUR point was to say that if someone WITHOUT authority (just acting on personal preference) was to tell you the same thing, then yes....I would either ignore that... or seek out someone who could tell me what the real policy is.

Just don't "assume" the Janitor, stockboy, cashier, etc...doesn't have authority to notify. They may well be acting as agent for the company or owner.

See, I find the criteria between oral and written to be such an unreconcialable chasm.

For example... Let's say you join a health club, and the WRITTEN CONTRACT you SIGN says, "No firearms are allowed on the premises. By signing this document you agree to not bring firearms into the facility." Let's say that it is NOT 30.06 posted. Guess what....that isn't binding written notification, even tho you SIGNED IT. Blows my mind... even in that form, it must be in the 30.06 language (although it seems to not require being in Spanish any longer).

It's just crazy, to me. :) Well, thanks for entertaining my hypothetical situation. I didn't ask the question because I'm trying to "fly under the radar" or anything, but because I think looking at extreme situations helps understand the law better...basically I'd rather talk it out than be a test case. LOL

Morgan wrote:See, I find the criteria between oral and written to be such an unreconcialable chasm.

For example... Let's say you join a health club, and the WRITTEN CONTRACT you SIGN says, "No firearms are allowed on the premises. By signing this document you agree to not bring firearms into the facility." Let's say that it is NOT 30.06 posted. Guess what....that isn't binding written notification, even tho you SIGNED IT. Blows my mind... even in that form, it must be in the 30.06 language (although it seems to not require being in Spanish any longer).

It's just crazy, to me. :) Well, thanks for entertaining my hypothetical situation. I didn't ask the question because I'm trying to "fly under the radar" or anything, but because I think looking at extreme situations helps understand the law better...basically I'd rather talk it out than be a test case. LOL

Amen!

Morgan wrote:Blows my mind... even in that form, it must be in the 30.06 language (although it seems to not require being in Spanish any longer).

Yep. Spanish isn't required on "a card or other document," but it is required if the written communication is a sign with one-inch-high lettering.

A verbal notice isn't worth the paper it's written on.

KBCraig wrote:A verbal notice isn't worth the paper it's written on.

hahahaha.

What if you're deaf? Hard-of-hearing? Had your iPod turned up? Weren't listening? Were daydreaming? Had your bluetooth in and were engrossed in conversation? Part of delivering a message is confirming that it was received, or he could just mutter all sorts of things under his breath. It's our responsibility to seek out proper 30.06 signs, so we can't use, "My eyes were closed when I went in the door" as a defense. We have no such responsibility to seek out oral permission.

Morgan wrote:WRITTEN CONTRACT you SIGN says, "No firearms are allowed on the premises. By signing this document you agree to not bring firearms into the facility."

You agreed to it by signing it. Forget about 30.06, this is a contract.