30.06 a personal thought

[fishingsetx]

No need for any of that as you've publicly admitted knowledge of the posting.

if they are going to go through the trouble of looking this up on the net on a simple (class a misdemeanor) trespassing charge, getting warrants to find out what email address is associated with my screen name, then tracing that email to the acct its registered to, then tracking down the account holder, then figuring out who actually uses said email, then linking it back to me. Yea it might end up as evidence. They would have to do that with the thousands of posts out there who have said the same thing I did as well and then figure out which was mine. Too much time, money, and man power for a relatively minor charge. We're not talking murder.

This isn't Facebook where your name is plastered all over everything.

Like I said before, I'm not talking what ifs, I'm talking real world.

 

[F350-6]

Like I said before, I'm not talking what ifs, I'm talking real world.

Real world today and some new fancy computer program that can do all that you mentioned that they invent tomorrow are two different things.

I'd guess the NSA could probably make short work of that search today.

 

[Booyah]

Please explain if you don't mind.

So say I go to my local mall, enter through sears that isn't posted. I'm walking through the mall and someone somehow figures out I'm armed and calls the police. I get stopped, checked, and informed the front entrance to the mall is posted and I'm in violation. So I could be charged with trespassing while armed even though I was never notified pursuant to 30.06?

It is as simple as what the law says.

PC 30.06 (a)...

(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, 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.

No where in the law does it say specifically where a 30.06 sign must be posted...at an entrance, at all entrances...nor does it say you must use a posted entrance for notice to have been given. As long as a property owner has met the requirements above then legally, notice has been given by written communication.

As you have said though, you are free to take your chances on being charged with a simple (as you put it) class A misdemeanor...just remember, that being charged with (not convicted of) a "simple" class A misdemeanor will lose you your CHL.

 

[fishingsetx]

It is as simple as what the law says.



No where in the law does it say specifically where a 30.06 sign must be posted...at an entrance, at all entrances...nor does it say you must use a posted entrance for notice to have been given. As long as a property owner has met the requirements above then legally, notice has been given by written communication.

As you have said though, you are free to take your chances on being charged with a simple (as you put it) class A misdemeanor...just remember, that being charged with (not convicted of) a "simple" class A misdemeanor will lose you your CHL.

So you are saying that because I get charged they will revoke my CHL? From what I understand, they may suspend it pending the outcome of the charge but even then that's a big maybe. As for the signage, it states that it must be conspicuous and in plain view of the public. So as has been stated, if I enter a business and there is not a sign in plain view where I would have seen it, I have committed no offence.

So, what you are saying is that a business owner could post a sign in the very back of the store near the bathrooms and have every chl holder found to be carrying in his store arrested for trespassing with a firearm.

Why is it that people assume law enforcement will always go to the absolute extreme on every charge they can? In the all dealings I've had with them, I have found the exact opposite to be true.

 

[Renegade]

Please explain if you don't mind.
?

Where in the law does it say you are exempt if you enter from an entrance where there is no sign?

So say I go to my local mall, enter through sears that isn't posted. I'm walking through the mall and someone somehow figures out I'm armed and calls the police. I get stopped, checked, and informed the front entrance to the mall is posted and I'm in violation. So I could be charged with trespassing while armed even though I was never notified pursuant to 30.06?

You were notified. Read the law and understand what constitutes "received notice."

 

[Renegade]

No where in the law does it say specifically where a 30.06 sign must be posted...at an entrance, at all entrances...nor does it say you must use a posted entrance for notice to have been given. As long as a property owner has met the requirements above then legally, notice has been given by written communication.

Winner winner chicken dinner. If the 30.06 sign is legal and is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public, they property owner has met the requirements.So much for the gun store commando theory of shopping for an unmarked entrance.

 

[Renegade]

So, what you are saying is that a business owner could post a sign in the very back of the store near the bathrooms and have every chl holder found to be carrying in his store arrested for trespassing with a firearm.

Why is it that people assume law enforcement will always go to the absolute extreme on every charge they can? In the all dealings I've had with them, I have found the exact opposite to be true.

Ignore the extreme, and focus on what I posted. Shopping for an unmarked entrance when 99% are marked will not be "law enforcement going to the extreme". It will be stupid is what stupid does.

 

[satx78247]

To ALL,

May I simply suggest that IF you should run up on retail/wholesale establishment with ANY sort of anti-firearms sign that you leave & immediately mail a postcard that states what you will NO LONGER buy at their place AND ask all your friends to do the same.

This simple technique works well & it's CHEAP.
(When I'm making a BIG purchase, like my recent buy of a large TV, I send a copy of the receipt where I paid for a competitor's product.)

yours, satx

 

[Booyah]

So you are saying that because I get charged they will revoke my CHL?

Let me be more clear, Government code 411.172 says that for a person to be eligible for a CHL, they must not have been charged with a class A misdemeanor. How a DA or judge chooses to handle that in any specific situation is a 'what if' I won't bother with.

...if I enter a business and there is not a sign in plain view where I would have seen it, I have committed no offence.

The section in bold was added by you and is not in the law. I will admit that your argument makes sense...but we are talking about the law...not common sense. I am also not a judge and my opinion of your interpretation of the law is meaningless.

So, what you are saying is that a business owner could post a sign in the very back of the store near the bathrooms and have every chl holder found to be carrying in his store arrested for trespassing with a firearm.

No I did not say that. I thought you were not talking "what if's" anyways?

Why is it that people assume law enforcement will always go to the absolute extreme on every charge they can?

I am not sure...but I am not sure how that applies to my response. I made no comments that could be interpreted as such. I simply am passing along what the law says. Do with it as you wish...just know the potential consequences.

 

[txinvestigator]

They would have a tough time with that one. I hate that place and only go a couple times a year and always use outlying store entrances (mainly sears) which aren't posted due to the much better parking.

As for them sifting through months of footage from multiple cameras, that I highly doubt. Not enough time or man power.

So in the real world not the what ifs,

1). You would have to get seen with a weapon.

2). You'd have to end up with a majorly bad responding cop willing to arrest on a bogus charge to please mall management.

3.). You would have to find a DA to prosecute a bogus case with little chance of winning

4). You would have to get a judge who was either influenced by mall management or anti CHL to allow the case.

5). You would have to have a jury of anti's.

The list could go on! I'll take my chances!

My chances of being mugged or worse I. The parking lot trump those by 1000%!

Yeah, there would not be months of footage. If you are found carrying past 30.06 the cops are going to the security office right then to review and copy video. It would not be a bogus charge if you were seen shopping for a non posted entrance. No law requires all entrances be posted or even any entrance, nor that you even saw the sign. To make 30.06, the sign has to be posted "conspicuously visible to the public". That's all

The DA would not be prosecuting a "bogus" case if you were caught shopping for an entrance. 4 and 5 are not correct either.

 

[seeker_two]

I agree.

Let free market handle the shit holes.

That works....until the businesses realize that they can get away with being shit holes....ever read THE JUNGLE by Upton Sinclair?

 

[txinvestigator]

So you are saying that because I get charged they will revoke my CHL? From what I understand, they may suspend it pending the outcome of the charge but even then that's a big maybe.

No. If you are charged with a Class A or B misdemeanor your license SHALL be suspended.

As for the signage, it states that it must be conspicuous and in plain view of the public. So as has been stated, if I enter a business and there is not a sign in plain view where I would have seen it, I have committed no offence.

That s not what the law reads. Plain view is not even mentioned. It also does not saw it must be conspicuously posted where everyone entering 'would have seen it" The law says, as it relates to the sign "is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.".

If it is at the main mall entrance it could easily meet that requirement.

So, what you are saying is that a business owner could post a sign in the very back of the store near the bathrooms and have every chl holder found to be carrying in his store arrested for trespassing with a firearm.

No one said that at all. Being posted there is completely different. A sign can give you notice either BEFORE you enter or AFTER you enter.

Why is it that people assume law enforcement will always go to the absolute extreme on every charge they can? In the all dealings I've had with them, I have found the exact opposite to be true.

it is not extreme for them to enforce the law. Shopping for a non-posted entrance should get you arrested.

 

[fishingsetx]

No. If you are charged with a Class A or B misdemeanor your license SHALL be suspended.

That s not what the law reads. Plain view is not even mentioned. It also does not saw it must be conspicuously posted where everyone entering 'would have seen it" The law says, as it relates to the sign "is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.".

If it is at the main mall entrance it could easily meet that requirement.

No one said that at all. Being posted there is completely different. A sign can give you notice either BEFORE you enter or AFTER you enter.



it is not extreme for them to enforce the law. Shopping for a non-posted entrance should get you arrested.

OK no shopping for unposted entrances going on. I was carrying in said mall for over 1.5 years before I ever saw a sign. Only reason I saw the sign is someone at work mentioned it was posted. So you are trying to tell me that if I had accidently flashed my weapon, I would have been arrested, had my CHL revoked permanently and been charged with a class A midemenor and probably convicted? Is this worst case? Yes it is, but I have more faith in law enforcement and our legal system than that. Again, what if vs real world!!!

Ya'll are assuming I'm driving around at every 30.06 posted place looking for an non posted entrance! That is not the case! If I honestly enter a business (like I have at this mall numerous times in the last 1.5 years) and there is no 30.06 sign on the two or three entrances I used, I am going to be thrown under the jail and drug through the coals!

As for the wording, you and the statute state: " is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public". My restroom analogy fits this just as well as the sign being posted on only one entrance! In both places the sign would be conspicuous and clearly visible to the public! So basically we should make a full walk around of the stores exterior and a full inspection if the stores interior public areas before we carry inside? If you want to take the words in the statute literally, that is what it literally means!

Its all going to boil down to the responding officer and the local DA. I'll take my chances.

No. If you are charged with a Class A or B misdemeanor your license SHALL be suspended.

That s not what the law reads. Plain view is not even mentioned. It also does not saw it must be conspicuously posted where everyone entering 'would have seen it" The law says, as it relates to the sign "is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.".

If it is at the main mall entrance it could easily meet that requirement.

No one said that at all. Being posted there is completely different. A sign can give you notice either BEFORE you enter or AFTER you enter.



it is not extreme for them to enforce the law. Shopping for a non-posted entrance should get you arrested.

 

[Dash Riprock]

To ALL,

WHEN I see a "no guns allowed" sign of any sort in SA (which is NOT often), I turn around & go elsewhere. THEN, I send a postcard to the business telling the owner/manager what I had planned to buy on their premises.
(That simple act, combined with the postcards of other gun-owners, resulted in the "anti-gun signs" coming DOWN.)

Please don't do that with gun buster or non-30.06 signs. Please assume that the business owner knows what he's doing and is trying to pacify the anti's. Please let those be.

 

[Younggun]

Please don't do that with gun buster or non-30.06 signs. Please assume that the business owner knows what he's doing and is trying to pacify the anti's. Please let those be.

Why would it matter. He's not telling them to correct their sign, he's telling them they lost business because of their sign.

 

[Younggun]

That works....until the businesses realize that they can get away with being shit holes....ever read THE JUNGLE by Upton Sinclair?

Never read the book.

If that happens it is the fault of the people who allowed it. I would rather take on that responsibility myself than have the gov babysit me. Maybe if people were faced with that responsibility they would quit being so dependent on the nanny state government.

 

[seeker_two]

Never read the book.

If that happens it is the fault of the people who allowed it. I would rather take on that responsibility myself than have the gov babysit me. Maybe if people were faced with that responsibility they would quit being so dependent on the nanny state government.

The Rockefellers & Carnegies would be so proud.....but I won't be eating dinner at your house anytime soon.

While we're at it, why not shut down the water treatment plants. If people can't get fresh water on their own, they don't deserve it, right?

 

[Younggun]

Lol, I didn't invite you to my house for dinner.

 

[Younggun]

I'm not sure where you made your leaps in reasoning, or why you think people being responsible in their choices leads to lack of freshwater and a monopoly of the steel industry.

 

[satx78247]

Younggun,

EXACTLY CORRECT.
For example, I'm currently having a 1982 Mercedes 300CD turbocharged diesel coupe restored & after I sent my "love notes" to several garages with "anti-gun signs", the signs CAME DOWN. = I call that: SUCCESS for less than 5 bucks.

When/IF it comes to the attention of store-owners that FOOLISH "kowtowing" to the BIGOTRY of gun-HATERS costs them $$$$ they generally STOP discriminating against CHL holders.

yours, satx