30.06 Sign at different entrance

[Pawpaw40]

I recently went to a mall in the DFW area through one of the store entrances. It did not have a 30.06 sign at that entrance. When I left, through one of the main entrances (#4 I think) I saw a legal 30.06 sign. Was I breaking the law? Can you be held responsible if the sign is not posted at the entrance you use?

 

[Dawico]

The sign was not in plain view. I think you were fine. That is my take on that situation.

 

[texas_teacher]

As long as you did not just miss it on that entrance... no you were not breaking the law... They might as you to leave or detain you if it so happens to be noticed that you are carrying but a quick review of the security film will show that their lack of clearly marking every entrance hindered your knowledge in this case...

 

[kingofwylietx]

One of my chl instructors said that the mall where he shops has an entrance that isn't posted. He said that he only uses that entrance so that he can carry, because without it posted, he is not notified.

 

[Clay]

30.06: What the law says:

PROHIBITING HANDGUNS IN A BUSINESS OR OTHER ENTITY
In order to provide notice that entry on property by a license holder with a concealed handgun is forbidden, 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."

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.

 

[codygjohnson]

It must be displayed at every entrance. I'm sure you're referring to Grapevine Mills. I boycott that place as much as possible. I don't mind saying that Grapevine Mills Mall hates the idea of you carrying a gun. They don't want your bussiness, they are as anti-gun as they can possibly be. Enter through Sun and Ski Sports, no sign there.

 

[Hawghauler]

When a company hangs a sign out in defiance of our constitution it leads me to believe they are anti-American and any profits they gain as a result of my patronage will be beneficial to anti-American socialists. I might as well send Pelosi a check and skip the middleman. I would think signs like that are a "Help Wanted" invitation to criminals. The sign should say:
Wanted: Armed Robber to pilfer stores and patrons. Safe work environment, short hours. Personal Protective equipment not required. Apply at cash register.

 

[txinvestigator]

It must be displayed at every entrance.

That is incorrect.

The law does not require it to be posted at ANY entrance, in fact.

Once you see the sign you are violating the law by entering.

The problem comes from places such as Grapevine Mills. If you park at the main entrance, see the sign, then walk around shopping for a non-posted entrance then you violate the law if you enter.

However, if you park at an anchor store, go thru an unposted entrance and you had not seen the sign at the other entrance, then you are OK.

Once you know the mall is posted, then any entrance into the mall with a handgun is a violation.

PROVING it is another matter. That said, once I know a place is posted I don't carry if I must go there. That is the law and I obey the law.

 

[txinvestigator]

When a company hangs a sign out in defiance of our constitution

Good grief this is 6th grade civics. Posting a 30.06 sign is not in defiance to the constitution. The bill of rights applies to the government, not to private businesses. The owner of this website can censor your posts, delete what you write and have rules regarding what you write. Is THAT a violation of the bill of rights to you?

Are you suggesting that YOUR perceived right is more important than the property owner's right to control his property?

 

[txinvestigator]

One of my chl instructors said that the mall where he shops has an entrance that isn't posted. He said that he only uses that entrance so that he can carry, because without it posted, he is not notified.

He is wrong if he knows the mall is posted.

 

[codygjohnson]

That is incorrect.

The law does not require it to be posted at ANY entrance, in fact.

Once you see the sign you are violating the law by entering.

The problem comes from places such as Grapevine Mills. If you park at the main entrance, see the sign, then walk around shopping for a non-posted entrance then you violate the law if you enter.

However, if you park at an anchor store, go thru an unposted entrance and you had not seen the sign at the other entrance, then you are OK.

Once you know the mall is posted, then any entrance into the mall with a handgun is a violation.

PROVING it is another matter. That said, once I know a place is posted I don't carry if I must go there. That is the law and I obey the law.

I shopped there for years without seeing a sign. I always entered through Sun and Ski, as there’s always been parking close to the door. I usually walked out of the entrance next to Sun and Ski and back to my car. One day, on the way out, I looked over and saw the sign. That's when I stopped going to Grapevine Mills. If the sign isn’t posted at the entrance where I can see it, it’s not conspicuous. If I did still go there, and Grapevine PD camped out at the other entrance so they could take me to jail, I’d have an easier time proving entrapment than they would that I saw the sign.

or they could just look my up on here...

 

[TxEMTP69]

Legal Dictionary

Main Entry: en·trap·ment
Function: noun
1 : the action or process of entrapping <entrapment is un-American and has no place in law enforcement —Tip O'Neill>
2 : the state or condition of being entrapped; also : the affirmative defense of having been entrapped by a government agent (as an officer or informant) —see also [SIZE=-1]PREDISPOSE[/SIZE]
NOTE: Entrapment is available as a defense only when an agent of the state or federal government has provided the encouragement or inducement. This defense is sometimes allowed in administrative proceedings (as for the revocation of a license to practice medicine) as well as criminal proceedings. In order to establish entrapment, the defendant has the burden of proving either that he or she would not have committed the crime but for the undue persuasion or fraud of the government agent, or that the encouragement was such that it created a risk that persons not inclined to commit the crime would commit it, depending on the jurisdiction. When entrapment is pleaded, evidence (as character evidence) regarding the defendant that might otherwise have been excluded is allowed to be admitted.


Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

 

[codygjohnson]

yep.

 

[okie556]

He is wrong if he knows the mall is posted.

I agree with TI........once you know the mall is 30.06 posted then you knowingly break the law by entering even if you enter through an unposted door. My question is this..........at another mall I know of.....the main door to the food court is 30.06 posted as with some other store entrances but this mall also has a Bass Pro Shop with it's own dorrs to enter. (Which are not posted.) If I enter through the Bass Pro unposted door....and then never leave Bass Pro......never go out into the mall area.....am I breaking the law??

 

[codygjohnson]

A friend who works across the street from that place just sent me a phone pic of the sign they have posted. On a big (well over 1", contrasting lettering) sign says the following in English and Spanish:

Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Article 4413 (29ee) Revised Statutes (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun.

No problem for CHL's here, carry all you want.

TI will be along shortly to tell you why.

 

[Hawghauler]

Good grief this is 6th grade civics. Posting a 30.06 sign is not in defiance to the constitution. The bill of rights applies to the government, not to private businesses. The owner of this website can censor your posts, delete what you write and have rules regarding what you write. Is THAT a violation of the bill of rights to you?

Are you suggesting that YOUR perceived right is more important than the property owner's right to control his property?

When a business asks me to leave my rights in the parking lot they can go pound sand. Perhaps Texas has a problem with rampaging CHL holders, but I haven't heard about it. I don't need many excuses to stay out of a box store, this would be good enough for me.

 

[okie556]

A friend who works across the street from that place just sent me a phone pic of the sign they have posted. On a big (well over 1", contrasting lettering) sign says the following in English and Spanish:

Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Article 4413 (29ee) Revised Statutes (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun.

No problem for CHL's here, carry all you want.

TI will be along shortly to tell you why.

No matter what loop hole you or TI finds in this sign..........I would not carry if I entered this store. I'm afraid a judge would agree the intent of the 30.06 law was met even if the sign is not perfect. Just me though!

 

[smschulz]

When a business asks me to leave my rights in the parking lot they can go pound sand. Perhaps Texas has a problem with rampaging CHL holders, but I haven't heard about it. I don't need many excuses to stay out of a box store, this would be good enough for me.

I cherish the 2A as much as anybody.
However, it is not a right (to carry) on someone else's property.
If the prohibition inhibits you from doing business with someone that does not allow ~ so be it ~ that is your right.
Respect for the law is paramount.

 

[codygjohnson]

No matter what loop hole you or TI finds in this sign..........I would not carry if I entered this store. I'm afraid a judge would agree the intent of the 30.06 law was met even if the sign is not perfect. Just me though!

It's possible, probably wouldn't even get to court, but it's possible. This isn't a loop hole, the law is very clear on what needs to be posted and the State of Texas makes it very easy to comply.

I know the intent of the mall is for me not to carry there, so I take my business elsewhere anyways.

 

[txinvestigator]

...at another mall I know of.....the main door to the food court is 30.06 posted as with some other store entrances but this mall also has a Bass Pro Shop with it's own dorrs to enter. (Which are not posted.) If I enter through the Bass Pro unposted door....and then never leave Bass Pro......never go out into the mall area.....am I breaking the law??

IMO, no. Bass Pro controls their store.