I think that it is a great idea to have the required language include the statement about governmental agencies.Soccerdad1995 wrote:I know that Charles and others are working hard on our behalf in this and many other areas, and I for one am extremely grateful for everything they are doing.
I am also very frustrated that our elected government officials, and unelected government employees that we are paying, are able to flaunt the law with no recourse whatsoever. I think this injustice is what irritates me the most.
I would love to see 30.06/30.07 signs issued for designated addresses only, clearly stating the name and address of the business, and including verbiage that it is not valid for any government owned property, and that anyone posting such a sign, or allowing it to remain posted, in such a location faces personal criminal penalties for doing so. Something like the following added to current wording:
"This restriction applies only to XYZ restaurant, located at 1212 Main Street, Anytown Texas. This sign shall have no effect at any other location, or for any other business that might be located at this address. If this property is owned by a governmental entity, this sign shall have no effect, and it is also a Class A misdemeanor for anyone in control of this property to display this sign, or allow it to remain displayed."
Yes, this makes signs even larger and more difficult to get. If people have an issue with that, they can thank the criminal government officials who have done everything possible to flout current law.
If we can't get all restrictions removed from every governmental location (including court rooms, etc), then issue those locations a different sign.
Search found 1 match
Return to “RIP - Fines for Signs”
- Mon Oct 24, 2016 1:07 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: RIP - Fines for Signs
- Replies: 63
- Views: 14278