This begs a question.....Dragonfighter wrote:Which is ANOTHER law that needs to be cleaned up. I have been in places where the sign was not visible until you are on the way out and had been in violation for over an hour. The signs at GP Verizon were never legitimate, improper size and such. There was one at the front door and if it is not there now, it has been taken down besides being unenforceable in the first place (City Property).sjfcontrol wrote:30.06 signs do NOT have to be posted at all entrances, or at any entrances for that matter. The law only specifies that they be "displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public".
Preface: The whole point of 30.06 signs is to give you proper notice. Even thought the law requires it to be conspicuously displayed in a manner clearly visible to the public (whether at the entrances or inside), that is not a guarantee that a CHL holder will actually see the sign. It is completely possible, even in good faith, for a conspicuously displayed sign to simply not be seen. Until you see the sign, have you been given proper notice? And if you have not been given proper notice, are you truly in violation?
This is not something I want to personally test, but it seems to me that you have a (possibly sketchy) defense to prosecution if you simply didn't see the sign, and here is what I base that logic on: If a Hotel lobby is posted 30.06, but the sign is behind the checkin desk rather than at the entrance, you are not in violation of 30.06 until you see sign. When you first enter, and you haven't seen the sign yet, you haven't yet received effective notice, and you have a defense to prosecution. Furthermore, although you are already inside the building, if you comply immediately once you see the sign by turning around and going right back outside, you still have a defense to prosecution because you formally complied with the sign upon receiving effective notice.
But let's say, hypothetically, that the Verizon Theater places a compliant sign at eye level on the wall next to the men's room entrance at the far end of the lobby, but you never go anywhere near the men's room, and in fact, manage to enter the theater, get to your seats, watch the show, and exit the theater without ever getting near enough to the sign to be expected to see it, were you truly in violation of 30.06?
If the theater has security cameras in place in the lobby, you might be able to subpoena the video records and prove beyond a shadow of doubt that you were nowhere near enough to the sign to see it. This strikes me as one very good reason for updating 30.06 to require the signs to be posted at all entrances, and making it a defense to prosecution if they are not so posted—much like the change made to 51% signage requirements.