TexasCHLforum.com

People make the argument all the time for "intent" when talking about various no-guns signs. My copy of the CHL handbook says that I can LEGALLY carry unless the sign meets ALL of the requirements listed under PC 30.06 (or the 51%, but that's another issue) - if it doesn't meet ALL the requirements, then I am not breaking the law when I carry, intent or not.

Will some lawyers try to bend the law and argue intent? I'm certain of it... but when does intent stop and the law begin? That's why so much work went into the writing of the CHL law to be as specific as possible. For example, you could argue intent on a stupid no-guns ghostbusters sign all day... they obviously don't want guns there, but anyone on this board would say don't worry about it, because it doesn't hold water legally. The same is true of the 30.06 signs. No one is trying to bend the rules so we can carry everywhere we want. But if we have to follow the rules, so do the businesses and sign-makers. If a sign is non-compliant by not meeting ALL of the requirements (1" tall letters, contrasting colors, english AND spanish, SPECIFIC wording as written in the PC) then we legally do not have to listen to it.

Worrying about your job is another matter all together. But again, that's not a legal issue as much as it's a personal choice on your part to decide whether self-defense or job security is more important. This is where the term "concealed means concealed" comes into play. If caught, you will probably be fired due to company policy - but there are no other legal ramifications to worry about.

Stay safe out there -
Burgi

Try this on fer size...

I have always sided with the law...Not that I should operate "under" the law, I like to think of it as a partner, and something to work in tandem with how I conduct myself with its meaning...

So I guess it has matured me in how I aproach the whole concept of self defense...

Sure I kinda scratch my head sometimes, like a lot of us do when it comes to this particular issue...I'll honor the law and its intent...Because a lot of smart people have discussed a great many things about this over many years, and a great majority of it makes sense to me, so I apply it and see how it fits within the way work...

Look at it this way...If the places where we are not supposed to go with a firearm, under any conditions...Become a very consistant battleground of shootings and other criminal activity...

The first thing I do is find a way NOT to go to those places...

Second, if I have to conduct business at places like that, I'll look for alternative ways of getting done what I need to get done, (i.e. online, mail, courier, etc etc.)

No need to interject yourself into a situation where you know there is a high degree of probablility that you'll have to clear leather and make a little noise...Right???

Excellent thoughts stevie, and I agree with you.

I was commenting more on this scenario though: Say you go to your local restaurant/ supermarket/ etc and they have a sign posted that meets the 30.06 wording, but not the 1" letter height. Many people have said they won't carry because the store's intent is to give you notice under 30.06. I'm making the argument that whatever their intent was, they didn't follow the law so I can still legally carry. I think it's reasonable to apply that same thought process to your personal encounters with no-guns signs that do not meet the requirements of the law.

I will not do business with anyone who puts up signs that are close to correct if I have a choice. I agree that the law was written, as it is, to leave no doubt to whether the sign are correct or not. That protects everybody. It cannot be a matter of intention as to how the law is written in my opinion. It either is correct or is not. I try not to enter, if in doubt, because I don't want the hassle of a trial and will not give my money to anyone who denies people of their ability to defend themselves. All, if I have a choice.

If the signs are not correct and I must enter then I carry. I will deal with the problems if it comes to that. If the signs are correct I look for other entrances that might not be posted. That makes the building not correctly posted. If I cannot find one and must enter then I disarm. They want to slam me for "intent" then they can try and I will defend myself against them the same way I would against anyone who tries stripping me of my rights.

This is all a moot point unless I don't conceal correctly or have to pull my weapon and someone sees it. I do what I must.

bburgi wrote:Excellent thoughts stevie, and I agree with you.

I was commenting more on this scenario though: Say you go to your local restaurant/ supermarket/ etc and they have a sign posted that meets the 30.06 wording, but not the 1" letter height. Many people have said they won't carry because the store's intent is to give you notice under 30.06. I'm making the argument that whatever their intent was, they didn't follow the law so I can still legally carry. I think it's reasonable to apply that same thought process to your personal encounters with no-guns signs that do not meet the requirements of the law.

Unfortunately their intent is clear...

Fortunately for us, most of the time there are other games in town...I'll play elsewhere...

I received a very lukewarm response to the idea that we amend the law to penalize businesses and entities that do not post 30.06 properly, either do it right, or not do it at all...Total enforcement, zero tolerance...

And to work into that a liability clause, that if you post/restrict, you have better have adequate security and reaction forces to handle potential incidences of violence on that business or entities ENTIRE property...

I figured I'd get at least a "harrumph" out of someone here...

stevie_d_64 wrote:
I received a very lukewarm response to the idea that we amend the law to penalize businesses and entities that do not post 30.06 properly, either do it right, or not do it at all...Total enforcement, zero tolerance...

And to work into that a liability clause, that if you post/restrict, you have better have adequate security and reaction forces to handle potential incidences of violence on that business or entities ENTIRE property...

I figured I'd get at least a "harrumph" out of someone here...

I'll give you a big "harrumph" and agree with you. The law clearly states that the sign must meet certain parameters in order to be valid, no allowance for intent. The law should be amended to a "Go/No Go" or at least interpreted similar to the no trespassing statutes, where intent doesn't mean diddly, if you don't post properly, your property is not posted.

How about if the business is open to the public then they are NOT ALLOWED to post a 30.06 sign of any kind. That is the way I would like to see it
Private clubs, organizations, etc. . . then post the sign if you wish, but not a business open to the PUBLIC. (my .02 )

stevie_d_64 wrote:I received a very lukewarm response to the idea that we amend the law to penalize businesses and entities that do not post 30.06 properly, either do it right, or not do it at all...Total enforcement, zero tolerance...

I agree with that.
I do, however, want to add, that I believe we all take this 30.06 thing rather personally.
I'm not saying we shouldn't, necessarily, but that maybe we should be a little less ZOMGRZ THEY GOTS THA SIGNZ about it.
Business has a 30.06 sign, for me, I have a few choices to make.
some are easier than others.



[/ramble]

in reality it doesn't matter squat about 'intent' or 'letter of the law'..

it Does matter how your lawyer could sell it to a jury of your peers..

para driver wrote:in reality it doesn't matter squat about 'intent' or 'letter of the law'..

it Does matter how your lawyer could sell it to a jury of your peers..

Exactly. The fact is you WILL spend alot of money defending yourself. If it is your place of employment YOU WILL be fired and then have to defend yourself while being unemployed.

I hear on here concealed is concealed but what if you have a medical emergency and the paramedics have to remove articles of clothing in order to give you medical treatment? They will find or expose your firearm and then you aren't concealed anymore and you have violated a questionable 30.06 posting which you will have to defend.

There are many unforseen scenarios that could lead to your being outed in a place that YOU THINK hasn't posted a proper 30.06 sign, unfortunetly that will be up to a jury to decide.

Again I will just save my money and time and wait for one of you eager CHLers to be the test case. I really hope that you set the bar for the rest of us to ignore those signs.

I am waiting for the moment that I am walking into a store and I see someone pulling out a ruler to measure the letters on a posted sign to see if they are actually 1" block letters. Maybe you can make an argument that the wrong font was used, or that there was incorrect spacing between the letters, or how about a comma was left out.

Noone is comparing ghost buster signs to 30.06 postings. If a store is posted with a legally looking 30.06 sign than I stay away if I am carrying plain and simple. I equate ignoring 30.06 signs because letters are .9 instead of 1", or white letters on glass isn't contrasting the same as looking for trouble.

The anti's read this forum also and I imagine that some of the stuff that gets posted here gets used against us specifically about ignoring a 30.06 sign that some feel is not legal because of their interpretation of the law.

What kind of ambassador to CHLers are you if you are measuring block letters, looking for entrances that may not be marked, or looking for any percieved technicality to ignore a 30.06 sign.

IMHO their is a differance between challenging a sign that appears to be legal and one that just doesn't even come close to being legal. The decisions we make are the ones we have to live with, and I am not willing to lose my job, my CHL, or money just because a sign MAY NOT be technically correct IE.. .9 black letters, missing a comma, missing a word, ect.

My personal policy has always been, that I'll obey any properly worded sign (meaning it has the right language, or close, in both spanish and english) if I see it.

If it's on the door I go through, or a sign that I can easily see approaching said door, i'll obey the sign and go spend my money elsewhere. I Do my best. For instance, I once had a salescall in an office building that posted 30.06 in the parking lot. I disarmed in my car, even though you could argue that I was breaking the law by entering the parking lot.

If I can't see the sign, meaning it's only on one door that I hadn't seen, or if it's on a signpost that I can't read, then I figure I've done my best.

Of course, this does not give me the right to "avoid" a sign if I know about it, for instance, seeing a posting at Grapevine Mills, and looking for an unposted door. We're honest people, and we know where we're not wanted; and will do our best to see our money spent elsewhere.

I don't have a problem with a small business posting 30.06--I will simply take my business elsewhere. It's the service provider's/ restaurant/store owner's business and is this person's choice. And my money is spent by my choice.

I do not like hospitals and professional buildings posting, however. Most people have little choice when a hospital visit is needed. When choosing a physician, the posting on the door should be at the bottom of the list of requirements. I realize hospitals and professional buildings are privately owned, but the nature of the business is more of a public service--I would like to see them treated like city/county/state offices with regard to CHL.

I've never knowingly walked past a 30.06 sign with my gun, however. (I do take the stun gun.)

Right2Carry wrote:Maybe you can make an argument that the wrong font was used, or that there was incorrect spacing between the letters, or how about a comma was left out.

Noone is comparing ghost buster signs to 30.06 postings. If a store is posted with a legally looking 30.06 sign than I stay away if I am carrying plain and simple. I equate ignoring 30.06 signs because letters are .9 instead of 1", or white letters on glass isn't contrasting the same as looking for trouble.

The anti's read this forum also and I imagine that some of the stuff that gets posted here gets used against us specifically about ignoring a 30.06 sign that some feel is not legal because of their interpretation of the law.

What kind of ambassador to CHLers are you if you are measuring block letters, looking for entrances that may not be marked, or looking for any percieved technicality to ignore a 30.06 sign.

IMHO their is a differance between challenging a sign that appears to be legal and one that just doesn't even come close to being legal. The decisions we make are the ones we have to live with, and I am not willing to lose my job, my CHL, or money just because a sign MAY NOT be technically correct IE.. .9 black letters, missing a comma, missing a word, ect.

That's my point though... I don't advocate looking for silly loopholes or ignoring signs that are obviusly legal. What I'm saying is that if a sign does not meet the specific requirements written in the law, it is no better than a ghostbusters sign. It's not about interpretation...

para driver wrote: but what if you have a medical emergency and the paramedics have to remove articles of clothing in order to give you medical treatment? They will find or expose your firearm and then you aren't concealed anymore and you have violated a questionable 30.06 posting which you will have to defend.

We have had forum members who have tested this one, right Carlson1?

Emergency responders and ERs have procedures for handling this scenario. Do not hesitate to carry because you might have to go to the hospital as a patient!

My personal standard is that if it is a "no guns" sign, their meaning is no unlawful carrying of firearms, a 30.06 in any form is sufficient warning to me, they don't want me there. If I were to be confronted where a no guns sign was posted, then I would leave immediately and do my best to find an alternative place to do my business.

Greetings--

First off-- INAL !!

I recall a comment from someone in the know a while back-- somthing to the effect that criminal law is very specific and to the letter- no room for the "intent" part of things-- its black and white.

I whole heartrdly agree with folks who say that they realize a sign poster's intent and decide to do business elsewhere. But- a 30.06 sign that's not posted according to the applicipable laws-- poster's intent not withstanding-- *shouldnt* stand up in a criminal court--

Not that I care to be a test case mind ya......