30.06 a personal thought

[txinvestigator]

That's when you explain to your kids why those people are bad.

Never to young to learn.

Bad? Really?

 

[Younggun]

Are they?

 

[Booyah]

The only time I step foot into places which have them is when I have business in an emergency room, in which case I always manage to find an entrance that isn't posted.

Just to be clear, with regards to being given effective notice, the law only says that a 30.06 sign must be "posted on the property" and "displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public" (not including the verbiage and lettering requirements). It does not say it must be at an entrance for you to have been given notice.

You may argue that "conspicuous" and/or "clearly visible to the public" reasonably means that it should be at an entrance (or even the specific entrance you used) and you might even win that argument...as long as you realize that the person you might have to make that argument to is a Judge that is deciding on your class A misdemeanor.

I am not saying that you are "wrong", I'm just clarifying what is and what is not in the law.


Regarding the OP subject, we all have decisions to make and I, like most of us here, minimize my need to enter 30.06 properties. I don't see the need to demonize a property owner for posting 30.06 though...as long as it is done legally. Most 2A supporters would also be in the camp of respecting personal property rights as well. I might disagree with it and I might even share that disagreement with the property owner/manager in an attempt to change their mind...but I wouldn't politically or socially demonize them any more than I would want to have the same done to me for supporting gun rights.

 

[kusai]

Just to be clear, with regards to being given effective notice, the law only says that a 30.06 sign must be "posted on the property" and "displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public" (not including the verbiage and lettering requirements). It does not say it must be at an entrance for you to have been given notice.

You may argue that "conspicuous" and/or "clearly visible to the public" reasonably means that it should be at an entrance (or even the specific entrance you used) and you might even win that argument...as long as you realize that the person you might have to make that argument to is a Judge that is deciding on your class A misdemeanor.

I am not saying that you are "wrong", I'm just clarifying what is and what is not in the law.


Regarding the OP subject, we all have decisions to make and I, like most of us here, minimize my need to enter 30.06 properties. I don't see the need to demonize a property owner for posting 30.06 though...as long as it is done legally. Most 2A supporters would also be in the camp of respecting personal property rights as well. I might disagree with it and I might even share that disagreement with the property owner/manager in an attempt to change their mind...but I wouldn't politically or socially demonize them any more than I would want to have the same done to me for supporting gun rights.

IMHO as i read somewhere and i agree 30.06 is just to punish law abiding citizen and not to inform the law.

 

[Charlie]

Fortunately, I have never seen a 30.06 sign in Kerrville or Kerr County in the 25 years I've been here. I guess I'm just lucky or blind.

 

[Booyah]

IMHO as i read somewhere and i agree 30.06 is just to punish law abiding citizen and not to inform the law.

30.06 signs are just a legally recognized mechanism by which private property owners can assert their property rights. I personally don't see how a property owner exercising their rights amounts to "punishment" of others...but to each their own. I am sure there is a segment of society that would argue that you exercising your 2A rights punishes them, as law abiding citizens.

 

[Saltyag2010]

I don't like or agree with 30.06 signs. I try and avoid them. I also ignore the "no firearms that don't have posted 30.06" signs. I'm weirdly amused by them.

I don't go to malls or emergency rooms or dumb liberal type stores that would post a 30.06 sign. I do go to bars and respect the 51% sign. I don't whole heartedly agree with it but I'll obey it vs getting a felony.

 

[TXDARKHORSE361]

Mom's demand action is an even smaller percentage of the national population, but they're vocal and do get some response.

I'm not familiar with that group, and good if they are having some success

Just an FYI navyguy MDA is an anti gun group, they were the ones fussing about the whole Target and open carry situation. They also demonize anyone who supports the NRA and have publicly said that NRA supporters should have their families killed.


On topic I don't typically run across a whole lot of the signs but when I do I choose to go elsewhere and make a mental note.

 

[XinTX]

IMHO as i read somewhere and i agree 30.06 is just to punish law abiding citizen and not to inform the law.

No. It's a manner by which a business owner can assert their property rights.

I had a close relative whose husband was shot and killed as she watched. To the day she died she had what an outsider might think an unnatural fear of guns. If you knew the story, it wasn't unnatural at all. Were she running a business, I guarantee it would have been posted. She never did talk about the need for any gun control laws. She just didn't want them around her.

Similarly, if you client base is a lot of MDA types, you may post your business because you know that anyone in your store printing might upset your customers.

But no business would want someone coming in their store and setting up a soap box and making loud political or protest speeches. It doesn't mean they're opposed to the 1st amendment. Just that they want to maintain a certain atmosphere in their business.

I do understand that some of the chain stores are posted because their HQ people are anti 2A. I get that. But not all businesses post due to their opposition to the 2A.

 

[Bozz10mm]

I don't visit or patronize very many new places or establishments. Creature of habit I suppose. But, if I ever do come across a properly posted 30.06 sign, more than likely I would leave the premises. Not because I want to boycott the place, but because I do not feel comfortable leaving a firearm in the vehicle. Sure, you can lock your vehicle, but that just keeps the honest people out.

If I know ahead of time that an establishment is posted, more than likely, I wouldn't go there in the first place. The only place I know of in my area that is properly posted is the IKEA store in Round Rock. And I haven't actually seen it, just pictures posted on the Texas CHL forum.

 

[big_bad_kitty]

I would just go elsewhere to do my business. I'm not comfortable locking a firearm in the car.

What he said!! X2!! I will not patronize any store, establishment nor merchant that posts a 30.06 sign anywhere on the property. I respect their right to post but they also have to respect my right to do business elsewhere with whom I please! I also will not go where the "Ghostbuster" signs are displayed. That also tells me the general attitude of the place that posts that crap! You do not want my business and money? Just posts something that even infers that you are against guns and concealed carry. I will drive 100 miles or more or even better, do without before I will spend my money and time with these lugnuts!!!

 

[OldCurlyWolf]

But not always. I've headed out to pick up a few things and have been surprised by postings a few times. I figure if I have to turn around and go back to my car, I might as well leave anyway.

 

[F350-6]

...but I wouldn't politically or socially demonize them any more than I would want to have the same done to me for supporting gun rights.

Not trying to argue with your post, but would like to point out that the other side is more than willing to demonize a company for not banning guns. Sometimes it's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease, so we need to decide when it's appropriate to squeak. Like maybe when there's a big email campaign trying to get a big store like say Target or Kroger's to ban guns. If the emails are 50/50, then it's more of a why change scenario as opposed to letting the other side do all the work and make it looks like it's a 99/1.

30.06 signs are just a legally recognized mechanism by which private property owners can assert their property rights. I personally don't see how a property owner exercising their rights amounts to "punishment" of others...but to each their own.

Agreed. However if the property owner/lessee is a big, publicly traded company and not some individual, then we have the obligation to point out to this for profit corporation that they are alienating a customer base.

Similarly, if you client base is a lot of MDA types, you may post your business because you know that anyone in your store printing might upset your customers.

If your client base is a lot of MDA types, then you place a big gunbusters sign that has no legal standing to appease them so they feel safe and secure while actually not doing anything. Or you do even less than that. (See Target and their press release that got minimal coverage that simply asked folks to leave their guns at home).

 

[Booyah]

...the other side is more than willing to demonize a company for not banning guns...

They certainly do and, for me, that is part of the reason why I am on the "other side" from them. I disagree with much of what they stand for and many of the ways they behave...namely, demonizing someone who is simply exercising their rights and doing so for political gain...not because they have actually been harmed. I will proudly not participate in that type of behavior and allow that difference be part of what defines me apart from them. I don't expect everyone else on "our side" to see it that way...but I do.

Agreed. However if the property owner/lessee is a big, publicly traded company and not some individual, then we have the obligation to point out to this for profit corporation that they are alienating a customer base.

I totally agree with participating in the larger social and political conversation, email campaigns, informing people and businesses of the facts and potential costs of caving to politically correct pressures...but truly demonizing others as a political tactic...not gonna happen even if they do it to me.

 

[ChrisX]

No. It's a manner by which a business owner can assert their property rights.

I had a close relative whose husband was shot and killed as she watched. To the day she died she had what an outsider might think an unnatural fear of guns. If you knew the story, it wasn't unnatural at all. Were she running a business, I guarantee it would have been posted. She never did talk about the need for any gun control laws. She just didn't want them around her.

Similarly, if you client base is a lot of MDA types, you may post your business because you know that anyone in your store printing might upset your customers.

But no business would want someone coming in their store and setting up a soap box and making loud political or protest speeches. It doesn't mean they're opposed to the 1st amendment. Just that they want to maintain a certain atmosphere in their business.

I do understand that some of the chain stores are posted because their HQ people are anti 2A. I get that. But not all businesses post due to their opposition to the 2A.

Many people make the assumption that they have Constitutional rights on private property. Little do they know!

 

[London]

I absolutely understand the sentiment here about "spend your money somewhere else" but when you go along with family and have kids who want to go that specific shop or that fun place you really dont have much choice. But honestly how do you splain kids that you can't go to a carousal because I cannot carry my safety tools.

Its Effed up.

I've actually had that exact conversation with my kid. Carousel and all.

 

[smee78]

I do not support any businesses that want to take away my right to protect myself or my family, I also make it a point to call and e-mail or write the company to let them know how and why I feel the way I do. It may not shake the foundation of the business but I think if more people spoke up and let them know why you refuse to spend your mony there then the signs may be removed, or not, either way it is what it is. I also have been known to find a door that is not marked and use that one if I really need to get something from there.

 

[V-Tach]

To me, when a business posts a 30.06, they are taking the responsibility for the customers safety. If they do not provide adequate security, they should not be able to post such a sign, imho.

Adequate security is not an 80 y/o with a radio or cell phone in a security guard uniform. The medical tower I worked in always hired elderly men, and they were not allowed to carry a gun, pepper spray or any type of weapon. He had a cell phone. That is not adequate security in my mind.

Adequate security is not having an off duty police officer standing around in a theatre either. It's better than nothing, but not adequate.

jmho...

 

[Younggun]

Why should they be responsible for your security simply because they allow you on their property?

You aren't being forced to go there.

 

[V-Tach]

I understand your point YG and while I agree......I'm sure personal injury attorneys don't share our opinion...lol...