30.06 posted but invited in.

[troglodyte]

We discuss what is a legal sign, what's the intent, where the sign is located, what constitutes notification, etc.

Try this one on for size.

If a business is posted 30.06 but someone in authority at or over the store invites you in while you are carrying, unbeknownst to them, can you legally enter?

Next question, if it changes anything, is what if the vice president and general manager of the region sends you a letter "personally inviting you to try <the product> out at any of our <city> stores (but later a specific store is indicated which, last time I was there, is posted).

Sounds like to me the person in charge has superceeded the sign and I can enter, at least under the provisions and limitations (expiration date) included in the letter or invitation.

What do y'all think?

[boomerang]

I think I don't want to be the test case.

[flb_78]

no.

[Teamless]

while you are carrying, unbeknownst to them

You are saying that you were invited in, while you were carrying.. BUT they did not know you are carrying?

If it were me, NO, I would not carry there.
if the sign is legal then that is it, Period. It doesn't say that someone NOT knowing you are carrying can ask you to come in.

thats like saying "I walked near the courthouse and the Judge asked me to come in"
At that point you have to say, "Sorry your honor, I cannot" until such time as you disarm of course, then you are free to go.

Or am I not reading your post properly, is there something I am not getting??

[austin-tatious]

[troglodyte]

I think y'all are reading me right.

Ahhh, but the State says I can't carry in the courts and the judge cannot supercede the State.

On the other hand, the business has the choice of posting or not posting and that is a management decision. If the management says come on in, how are you illegal? If a location had a no tresspassing sign and the owner/manager/person in charge says come on in then you are not tresspassing, you are an invited guest until the invitation expires or is revolked. I hunt on land that is posted at the owner's invitation so I am not tresspassing.

An honest question, what's the difference?

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Article 4413(29ee), Revised Statutes, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:.......

Effective Consent
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/d ... m/pe.1.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
PENAL CODE
Sec. 1.07. DEFINITIONS. (a) In this code:
(19) "Effective consent" includes consent by a person legally authorized to act for the owner. Consent is not effective if:
(A) induced by force, threat, or fraud;
(B) given by a person the actor knows is not legally authorized to act for the owner;
(C) given by a person who by reason of youth, mental disease or defect, or intoxication is known by the actor to be unable to make reasonable decisions; or
(D) given solely to detect the commission of an offense.

Now this begs the question of what "carries a handgun....without effective consent" means. Does this mean the representative has to specifically say you can carry a weapon?

Seeing that reading legal documents is not my forte I'm not sure what this really means in context of the rest of the code.

I'm not willing to be the test case anymore than anyone else.

What got me thinking, ironically at that, is a letter I received from ATT wanting me to try out U-verse. The letter invited me to a local ATT store to "come in and test drive" U-verse. That store is 30.06 last time I checked (and honestly that has been a good while ago). I have spoken with management at the store and written letters waaaay up the chain of ATT/Cingular to no avail. I just thought it would be ironic that a form letter might just get me in the store that has told me they don't want my business.

[srothstein]

The key is "effective consent." If the manager knew you were carrying and said something like, "come on by and try this, there is no need for you to disarm when you come in" then he is overriding the sign and would be legal (if he admits this in court). If they did not know you were carrying, I would think they did not give you effective consent to enter with the weapon.

[JNMAR]

I think it'd be a safer bet to get a buddy to go in ahead of you and covertly remove the 30.06 sign. Beyond that just go for it and let us know how it works out for ya.

[JNMAR]

The key is "effective consent." If the manager knew you were carrying and said something like, "come on by and try this, there is no need for you to disarm when you come in" then he is overriding the sign and would be legal (if he admits this in court). If they did not know you were carrying, I would think they did not give you effective consent to enter with the weapon.

I'm with you on that and I think I'd want it in writing over his signature and title, just in case he came down with a case of amnesia.

[troglodyte]

The key is "effective consent." If the manager knew you were carrying and said something like, "come on by and try this, there is no need for you to disarm when you come in" then he is overriding the sign and would be legal (if he admits this in court). If they did not know you were carrying, I would think they did not give you effective consent to enter with the weapon.

I'll buy that.

I'm with you on that and I think I'd want it in writing over his signature and title, just in case he came down with a case of amnesia.

For sure.

As a student of Texas CHL and soon to be Instructor I am constantly trying to play these mind-games and figure out what is right, as in legal. I often pour over this site reading all the discussions along these lines. In general, most of us will not have to worry about most of these things but I like to study and ponder.

I have a lot of folks that ask me specific questions. Most are easy enough (i.e. church carry) but it's questions like mine that I study on. Often I can find the answer somewhere on here, which makes this site indispensible for Texas CHL holders.

Thanks for the discussion.

[RPB]

I"ve thought about going to a Posted jewelry store, standing outside and hollaring in that I need to buy something. Then if they invite me in, I'd refuse to enter until they remove the sign. Once it's taken down, I'll accept the invitation to do business with them.

[wheelgun1958]

30.06=no money. 51%=no money. I won't patronize establishments where my sidearm isn't welcome.

[Salty1]

I agree that if an establishment posts their place of business I am not going to spend my money there, even if it is not a legal 30.06 sign, I am not going to play their games with them. If the management welcomed me in I would make a stipulation that I would enter soon as they tore up their signs. If they do not trust me to carry in their place I do not trust them that my hard earned money is not supporting the anti-gun administration.

[rm9792]

I think I would stand there and keep looking back and forth between the sign and the inviter, he will get the message. But dont overtly say you have a gun.

[jmra]

I think the whole "I can come in if you invite me" thing only legally works for vampires.