March 22nd, 2009 03:49 PM
Feel your pain...
We are in the same situation. Got rings,watches,necklaces (you get my point) and then a while later they put up "the sign". I make a point of telling them EVERY time we get our stuff inspected that they won't get our money for anything anymore. I hope eventually they'll get a clue.
((Place funny, whitty comment here))
March 23rd, 2009 06:51 AM
often a store will knowingly post a sign that is not in compliance with statues. A person with a legal CCL/CWP knows what is legal and can carry because the signs are not up to snuff. The folks that don't know what is legal and antigun are placated and think the store or company is antigun also. The businesses do this to make both markets happy. It happens in my town, local LEOs and SLED even teach it in CWP class.
Know your local laws and follow them to the letter.
March 23rd, 2009 11:20 AM
Those are not legal postings. I would ignore it and conduct business as usuall if they have a certain piece I'm looking for. After all, my weapon is CONCEALED, will stay concealed for the duration of my outing, and NO BODY will know I have a gun on my person.
If you keep it concealed...and others have no clue to you being armed....whats the problem.
March 23rd, 2009 11:37 AM
Upon what basis do you say those signs are not legal? The photo is too fuzzy to see the writing, and I don't see a ruler for comparison.
Originally Posted by Frogbones
I find it incredibly irresponsible to recommend carrying or saying you would carry based on a fuzzy photo with no way to confirm the size or legality of the sign.
March 23rd, 2009 11:56 AM
The reasoning on what I said is because I see 30.06 signs that are legal alot. At my schools I work and @ the gunshows I attend plus other places of business. The signage that is posted above is not in legal standing for a conceal carrier. I don't have to read the writing..the whole way it is presented, is contrast to the legal posting of such rule.
Also I didn't suggest ANYTHING..I simply stated what I would do.
Plus on both "signs" even though blurry neither start by saying "PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06, PENAL CODE"
If I'm proven wrong I will stand corrected and degress.
March 23rd, 2009 12:26 PM
I think Frogbones is right here
I could not see the signs clearly so didn't comment, but it does look as if the ""PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06, PENAL CODE" part is not included or not included correctly.
Originally Posted by Frogbones
Personally, I would choose to honor the sign as the owner made his wishes known, but these signs the OP showed do not appear to meet the specific design requirements of a legal 30.06 sign.
March 23rd, 2009 12:51 PM
Well, I respect you guys who honor others wishes (not being sarcastic). Even though they don't respect or honor yours.
Though ME and ME only (not suggesting to others), I will only honor wishes of business owners that force me to adhere legally by posting legal signage telling me I can't enter with a gun licensed or unlicensed...then I will most likely do business else where.
If they went through the trouble of posting legal 30.06, I will go through the trouble of going somewhere else.
But bogus signage and the "wishes" of me being unable to defend myself and my better half.....they can kiss it.
Plus my PD of choice stays concealed and nobody (other than wife) knows anything about it.
March 23rd, 2009 01:27 PM
I can't even tell which side is in English vs Spanish, so if you can make out that it doesn't have the first line properly, your imagination or deducement is better than mine.
Originally Posted by Hopyard
I can promise one thing...if it ever came up, the DA would have a much better picture.
March 23rd, 2009 01:36 PM
It really is hard to tell what the sign says and how big the letters are. So without being able to read it I can't comment on whether or not it is a valid sign.
That being said, the sign is not "illegal". Just because the sign may not meet the criteria defined in 30.06 does not make it illegal. A business owner can place whatever signage he wants on his building and will not be against the law or "illegal". How about using "invalid" or doesn't meet the legal requirements of 30.06.
My credit union put up a sign that was not correct, I wrote a letter to them, and they removed the signage. Informing a business of their error is all one can do. Well that and not do business with them in the future.
Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
Texas CHL Instructor
Texas Hunter Education Instructor
March 23rd, 2009 01:39 PM
The thing is English and Spanish HAVE TO BE ON THE SAME SIGN.
They can't be sepreate signs..thats the givaway right there...that it isn't legally binding...no matter the darn focus or interperation of imagination...stop the belittlement.
Actual 30.06 sign that is legal
Ordered from the DPS as most do, to avoid invalid signage.
Plus it HAS to be a sign with borders and such....not lettering on transparent glass.
That is bout as legal as you can get....if a sign doesn't have it like that I'm not legally bound to it...they can kiss it.
PLUS noone would know I'm carrying...... even then if I had to use it (I pray not) in a place where they wished I didn't have one in the first place....well, better tried by 12 than carried by 6.
Oh as Mr. Wolf stated...it's invalid...not illegal....but I got OP point.
March 23rd, 2009 02:08 PM
Okay, first of all, we'll go back to statutes instead of pure conjecture...
From Penal Code 30.05 Criminal Tresspass
So, in any case, you can be arrested for Criminal Tresspass.
(a) A person commits an offense if he enters or remains on or in property, including an aircraft or other vehicle, of another without effective consent or he enters or remains in a building of another without effective consent and he:
(1 ) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(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 concealed handgun and a license
issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry
a concealed handgun of the same category the person was carrying
That means you get to go to jail, you get to hire an attorney, you get to go to court, and then you have a built in defense...does it get that far? Who knows? Depends on the DA.
So, now that we know you can be arrested for criminal tresspass, lets look at the 30.06 requirement that everybody is so fond of trying to find ways around.
PC 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN.
As far as what sign means, from webster, definition 5b: a posted command, warning, or direction.
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language
identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code
(trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person
licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Govemment Code (concealed
handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
Definition of contrast, 3: a person or thing that exhibits differences when compared with another.
I can't read the writing. I can't tell what size the lettering is. What I can you is that Jared's jewelery is not worth commiting or potentially committing a Class A misdemeanor to me.
As far as the above sign by Frogbones, I could easily say it was not legal because it does not have the 'identical words' as pursuant to 30.06. It has several extra lines, symbols and words.
March 23rd, 2009 02:13 PM
OK, got the handbook out:
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun," or
(B) a sign posted on the property that: (i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish; (ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and (iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
Interestingly, the added language in the shown sign posted by Frogbones does not appear to be statutory--that is, the part talking about, "any person entering this facility is subject to physical search," is not statutory.
I wonder if this added language would invalidate the sign. I also doubt that the posting of that portion of the sign gives the proprietor any right whatsoever to physically search anyone.
So, so far, no one has it right, I think.
A common sense approach is to figure out what the property owner wants, and be respectful, and if you don't like it go elsewhere.
It is a lot easier to do that than argue or litigate or defend later, and it sure is a lot less expensive and a lot less trouble.
March 23rd, 2009 02:26 PM
I just copied it from the PDF...it's quicker than typing it, but good on you Hopyard.
Without a better picture of the signs, no one of us could be positive we were right. That is why everytime somebody says, 'its not legal, I would carry anyway', I poke my head back into this thread.
March 23rd, 2009 02:34 PM
I just saw the edit frogbones, are you saying that sign was ordered from DPS, with the extra writing? and the 'subject to search'? And it's required to have borders, huh? Even though its not on the statutes?
Originally Posted by Frogbones
Well, I just spent about 15 minutes looking for the order form for the sign on DPS and can't find it. I'm on hold with them right now, so I'll ask about how best to go about ordering signs since I have never heard of dps selling such signs.
As long as I am on the phone, I'll ask them if it has to be on the same sign and if it has to have a border.
Me thinks you might have gotten a little bit ahead of yourself.
March 23rd, 2009 02:36 PM
Yes no Jareds for me either....
Originally Posted by Kerbouchard
Funny that the sign I posted is not valid....cause the one for the gun shows @ Will Rogers is also not valid for they say the same thing....heh...nobody can get it right it seems.
Yes, so the SRO (on sight police) said....that sign was order from the texas DPS.
Anywhooo.....they can still kiss it.
By NJB in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: December 20th, 2011, 04:15 PM
By pcon in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: January 12th, 2010, 11:56 AM
By Rock and Glock in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: June 29th, 2007, 06:34 PM
By glockmav in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: August 31st, 2006, 08:35 PM
By Gary Slider in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: August 9th, 2006, 11:10 PM
Search tags for this page
30.06 sign texas
3006 sign texas
legal 30.06 sign
picture of 30.06 sign
texas 30.06 sign
texas 3006 law
texas 3006 sign
texas pc 30.06
texas penal code 30.06
texas penal code 30.06 sign
texas penal code 3006
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors