2) A CHL holder cannot carry inside of a building marked with a proper 30.06 sign. Can't carry outside the building either.
Ummmm....could you quote me the section that covers that claim, please???
2) A CHL holder cannot carry inside of a building marked with a proper 30.06 sign. Can't carry outside the building either.
I think he means if you don't have a CHLUmmmm....could you quote me the section that covers that claim, please???
I think he means if you don't have a CHL
I can't walk up to the door, see the sign & then say, sit on a bench on the sidewalk for a little while?
Ummmm....could you quote me the section that covers that claim, please???
Hmmm...okay - now, where in the bill did they define the terms used? Because under THAT definition, it would extend to the parking lots as well - which have already been held to be exempt from 30-06.
Hmmm...okay - now, where in the bill did they define the terms used? Because under THAT definition, it would extend to the parking lots as well - which have already been held to be exempt from 30-06.
Ummm....okay - but I've got to say I'd like to know their definitions. Because the devil's usually in the details - as I've always been given to understand it, they can restrict the building, but not the common/public areas, because they're not under their direct control.
If the mall and parking area is privately owned then yeah they could do that. To be effective they would need to post a sign at every possible entrance to the parking area, I would think. Otherwise people would have to go back to their vehicle upon viewing a sign and might be inclined to just ignore it. I would choose to shop at another mall.Okay then - guess I'm dense. A mall decides that they want to be a "gun free zone". Are you telling me that they can post the ENTIRE PREMISES as such? To include parking lot (outside of POV's), walkways, sidewalks, etc. that are outside of the building itself? How would they provide effective signage?
Okay then - guess I'm dense. A mall decides that they want to be a "gun free zone". Are you telling me that they can post the ENTIRE PREMISES as such? To include parking lot (outside of POV's), walkways, sidewalks, etc. that are outside of the building itself? How would they provide effective signage?
MPA overrides 30.06?Of course car carry is not carry under a CHL so it is not effected by 30.06.
MPA overrides 30.06?
MPA overrides 30.06?
30.06 only applies to people carrying on authority of a CHL
Generally laws don't override other laws, they just apply differently or are from different jurisdictions. As Bith points out; when I am carrying in my car I am not carrying under the authority of my CHL. 30.06 is only directed at those carrying under a CHL. If the parking lot is posted, I can drive in, but cannot carry outside of my car.
Penal Code Section 30.06(c)(3)(B) further states that a sign must meet the following requirements:
(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.
Penal Code Section 30.06(c)(3)(A) requires that a written communication contain the following language:
"PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06, PENAL CODE (TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF A 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."
"CONFORME A LA SECCIÓN 30.06 DEL CÔDIGO PENAL (TRASPASAR PORTANDO ARMAS DE FUEGO) PERSONAS CON LICENCIA BAJO DEL SUB-CAPITULO H, CAPITULO 411, CODIGO DE GOBIERNO (LEY DE PORTAR ARMAS), NO DEBEN ENTRAR A ESTA PROPIEDAD PORTANDO UN ARMA DE FUEGO."
Sorry to back track guys, but I have a question as to what constitutes a valid 30.06 notice. I know:
and
My question is about "language". I came across what I initially thought a valid posting. Upon closer review, I noticed that some of the wording was not quite right (the part in blue above referred to "Article 4413(29ee), Revised Statues"). Upon discussing it with a coworker (a fellow CHL) he felt it was probably valid. Does "language" mean that the wording must be exact, and if so, does anyone know where to find the definition? I looked but could not find it. I appreciate yall's thoughts.