TexasCHLforum.com

Folks,

I just got back from The Galeria mall in Houston. I entered at Neiman Marcus and photographed the entryway to prove that there was no signage. I looked at one direct entry to the mall and it wasn't posted, but I've heard horror stories of Simon's Malls being posted 30.06.

Anyway, I'm just curious if any of you do this, or agree that snapping a picture of the entryway might be a good idea to cover ourselves should we ever need to prove that we received no written notification concerning concealed or open carry.

Embalmo

Embalmo wrote:Folks,

I just got back from The Galeria mall in Houston. I entered at Neiman Marcus and photographed the entryway to prove that there was no signage. I looked at one direct entry to the mall and it wasn't posted, but I've heard horror stories of Simon's Malls being posted 30.06.

Anyway, I'm just curious if any of you do this, or agree that snapping a picture of the entryway might be a good idea to cover ourselves should we ever need to prove that we received no written notification concerning concealed or open carry.

Embalmo

I am not a lawyer, but I don't think you can prove a negative by snapping a picture.

Unless you're positive that there was no sign there when you entered.

Since all modern photographs contain metadata including date/timestamps, it's proof that the sign was not there when the photograph was taken.

It's evidence that the sign was not in the field of view of the camera anyway.

baldeagle wrote:Since all modern photographs contain metadata including date/timestamps, it's proof that the sign was not there when the photograph was taken.

I didn't think of that. Now it seems even better. The photo taken with my phone is also GPS location stamped. It seems that it would be difficult to accuse me of receiving notification. I got the idea from working at HEB while back at college. I always snapped a picture when I did a price check to show the customer that they were wrong, or to show my manager that they were right.

JALLEN wrote:It's evidence that the sign was not in the field of view of the camera anyway.

I took a about 3 to quick pics to show a couple of angles to find the entryway.

Embalmo wrote:Folks,

I just got back from The Galeria mall in Houston. I entered at Neiman Marcus and photographed the entryway to prove that there was no signage. I looked at one direct entry to the mall and it wasn't posted, but I've heard horror stories of Simon's Malls being posted 30.06.

Anyway, I'm just curious if any of you do this, or agree that snapping a picture of the entryway might be a good idea to cover ourselves should we ever need to prove that we received no written notification concerning concealed or open carry.

Embalmo

Seems like an awful lot of work to prove a negative. They dont always post their properties, but their reputation is well earned.

The chances of them catching you carrying concealed is about ZERO and the worst they can do if you're tagged OC (when legal) is give you the boot. If you don't see a sign at/near the door you walked in, I wouldn't sweat it.

Taypo wrote:

Embalmo wrote:Folks,

I just got back from The Galeria mall in Houston. I entered at Neiman Marcus and photographed the entryway to prove that there was no signage. I looked at one direct entry to the mall and it wasn't posted, but I've heard horror stories of Simon's Malls being posted 30.06.

Anyway, I'm just curious if any of you do this, or agree that snapping a picture of the entryway might be a good idea to cover ourselves should we ever need to prove that we received no written notification concerning concealed or open carry.

Embalmo

Seems like an awful lot of work to prove a negative. They dont always post their properties, but their reputation is well earned.

The chances of them catching you carrying concealed is about ZERO and the worst they can do if you're tagged OC (when legal) is give you the boot. If you don't see a sign at/near the door you walked in, I wouldn't sweat it.

Perhaps at one time, but now it's a matter of pulling your phone out and tapping one button. And there are much worse things that they can attempt to do.

Don't need proof, just reasonable doubt.

But it does seem like a lot of work. Surely the store already has cameras watching the entrance. If you ever ended up in court, that video tape would become part of the evidence.

I'd think that it could be proof that there was no signage there when you went in, if there was a problem. Great proof if for example, after the fact (any incident) if they then put up a sign and tried to claim it was posted all along. I'd consider taking a panorama shoot to show the entire front entrances.

Simon malls, at least the ones near me, don't post 30.06 signs.

They just have a "Conduct Policy" sign in doors where they state that no weapons are allowed, along with a bunch of other rules. Definitely not a legal 30.06. Carry on.

Firewheel Mall in Garland is owned by Simon, but it is an "open air mall", meaning you walk from store to store outside and each store has their own front doors. Overall the mall is not posted, but some of the stores or shops are. As an aside, the open air concept is not a very good idea in Texas in the summer or winter in my opinion, but they are always crowded, so what do I know?

JALLEN wrote:It's evidence that the sign was not in the field of view of the camera anyway.

A series of photos starting from a distance and zooming in on whatever signs are present would remedy that.

baldeagle wrote:Since all modern photographs contain metadata including date/timestamps, it's proof that the sign was not there when the photograph was taken.

Metadata is editable. It's irrelevant.