SB 11 Conference report passed the Senate yesterday and the House today. On the way to the governor for signing.Any word on Campus Carry yet?
I expect we may see a mix of 30-06 and 30-07 signs as some businesses may choose to allow concealed but not open carry. Denying both would require posting 2 large unattractive signs near each entrance and with TABC requirements, places like Sprouts (at least the local one) are running out of space to post the required signs. Not that this will alter Sprouts polocy--I expect to see a 30-07 sign go up before January.Im sure the unintended consequence of open carry will be more 30.06 signs.
I expect we may see a mix of 30-06 and 30-07 signs as some businesses may choose to allow concealed but not open carry. Denying both would require posting 2 large unattractive signs near each entrance and with TABC requirements,
Not in Texas. The law specifically states the requirements for signage appicable to CHL holders. Any non conforming sign can be ignored by a CHL holder without penalty of law. Ignoring a legally conforming sign is currently a Class A misdemeanor, but the new law reduces that to a Class C Misdemeanor. Failing to leave after being orally notified firearms are not welcome is a Class A Misdemeanor. Openly carrying past a non compliant sign may get an immediate oral notification, but carrying concealed will probably go unnoticed in most cases. No harm, no foul.Actually denying both would be as simple as posting a sign that says "No Guns", or a picture of a handgun inside a red circle with a line drawn through it.
There is no need or requirement for a business to post an unattractive Compliant sign. Any sign,any size will do and any sign, any size will inform the potential costumer that his/her firearm is not welcome.
The Non-compliant sign may not carry the force of law, but it still conveys the wished and "demands" of the property owner and failure to obey a non-compliant sign will still get you an invitation to the front door.
The only reason a business owner would need to post an unattractive Compliant sign is if he/she wished to legally punish or file charges against anyone that violated their wishes.
Any non conforming sign can be ignored by a CHL holder without penalty of law.
Sorry...I missed your post.SB 11 Conference report passed the Senate yesterday and the House today. On the way to the governor for signing.
Change "will" to "may" and I will concur. There is a business in town with two doors and they only had a compliant sign posted at a door I never used and I didn't know it was posted. I carried (concealed) in there for months before they finally posted a sign and I stopped going in there. But I was never once asked to leave.That is exactly what I posted. It can be legally ignored, but it will still get you and invitation to the front door if you carry past it.. The only difference between a Compliant sign and a non-compliant sign is that a Law enforcement officer will not be involved when you are asked to leave after carrying past a Non-Compliant sign. Either way, you will be out the door.
As a matter of fact, there doesn't even need to be a sign at all.
If you carry into a business that is not posted at all, you can still be asked to leave for carrying into their establishment.
steve4102 said:It can be legally ignored, but it will still get you and invitation to the front door if you carry past it.. The only difference between a Compliant sign and a non-compliant sign is that a Law enforcement officer will not be involved when you are asked to leave after carrying past a Non-Compliant sign. Either way, you will be out the door.
(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.
OK, this does raise a question.What a brilliant way you have discovered to get sued.
If a state has clearly defined verbage and signage for legal exclusion of a person or activity, and you decide to bypass that and make up your own version... better have a good lawyer on retainer for the inevitable lawsuit. If you want to retort with the time tested "but a business can deny service to anyone".. BS, garbage and poppycock. That's not even remotely true.
Furthermore, the "gunbuster" sign, without clear legislation defining it as prohibiting firearms means no such thing to me. All it means to me is that nylon stickers in the shape of Beretta 92s are verboten on that piece of glass.
Post a sign that says "No Guns" and I'll simply assume you failed 3rd grade as there is no Verb in what I assume was supposed to be a sentence.
So yeah, you can call the police, and they will ask me to leave to defuse the situation you have caused, but I'll be right back in a couple days when I feel like shopping again. Kick me out enough times without a solid, communicated, consistent and one hope for you, legally binding policy, and I'll sue you for harassment.
FYI: You might want to read Texas Penal Code 30.05:
So, yeah, 30.05 (criminal trespass) doesn't apply if the reason for the expulsion is a legally carried firearm, which means only 30.06 applies. And 30.06 requires the proper, legally binding signage.
Good luck getting sued.
FWIW, OCT is currently seeking contributions to support a civil rights action against DPS.Ed
What you replied with regarding the statute is well known by the cap and ball crowd and pretty much exactly what the OCT guys carrying the unloaded percussion revolvers posed to the DPS guys when they got arrested. They were first asked to leave. They refused citing right of assembly as well as the info you stated. They still got a ride to the pokey. I dont think the judge made any kind of decision that would actually create case law. He just.dismissed the charges in the interest of justice or something like that. I could be wrong.