TexasCHLforum.com

dicion

Yup. Just because some sign says something's unlawful, doesn't mean it actually is.

dicion

Purplehood wrote:
Jumping Frog wrote:Hello from Ohio. I thought I'd start familiarizing myself with Texas Concealed Carry because I have three brothers that live in Texas and I am planning on moving down in the future.

First, the whole point of my questions is to understand Texas law (obviously), but my frame of reference right now is I am intimately familiar with Ohio law. So no offense is meant if I am framing my questions that way.

1. Does Texas require you "knowingly" violate the statute? What if you are distracted and honestly didn't see the sign? (In Ohio, the statute uses the word "knowingly" instead of recklessly or negligently. This means if I am worrying about my job or my kids or otherwise distracted and negligently fail to see and read the sign, I haven't technically violated the statute and would use that defense if charged.)

2. Does Texas require every entrance to be posted for a valid prohibition? (For example, our local AMC theater has about 12 different doors as entrances. Some are posted and some are not posted. In Ohio, if I went in a non-posted entrance and I not breaking the law.)

TIA.
Wow. I prefer the Ohio interpretation as I don't think it works that way here...

Agreed!

Jumping Frog, for your original questions,

#1 - No, if you violate the statute, you violate the statute. Accidental or not. The statute requires that signs be placed 'conspicuously', so you can argue that maybe they were not 'conspicuous', but you would be making that argument in court, after being arrested.
I'm assuming that you read the whole thread up to this point, so you know that only a Valid 30.06 sign, or a 51% Sign counts. No Gunbusters sign, 'No Guns' sign, etc is legal to prevent you from carrying.

Now, in regards to #2, once again, for the 30.06 sign, it just says 'conspicuously'... that's its only requirement. How that is applied would be up to the court.
For a 51% sign, however, TABC Law requires that it be posted at the main entrance, yes. I'm not sure of EVERY entrance, but at the Main entrance, yes. Also, in regards to the 51% sign, an improperly posted sign is a defense to prosecution in case you get busted. This means you will probably still be cuffed and stuffed, but if you can prove the sign was not properly posted, they have to let you off.

dicion

He was talking about 2 different signs.

He mentioned that the first one (the pictured one) is non-compliant due to wording.

The second one (no picture) he said was compliant every other way, but had certain contrasting colors for certain words.
I would say that the contrasting colors would not invalidate the sign, as long as they were still clearly readable.

dicion

glbedd53 wrote:OK, I guess I was thinkin federal.

Ah yes, Federal Law is different entirely, but they generally have their own signage that states such :)

But it is definitely not against State Law to carry on Federal Government property

dicion

glbedd53 wrote:Could you clarify that first exception for me?

Sure!

Texas Penal Code, section 30.06, subsection (e) reads as follows:

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section
that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is
owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or
other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying
the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

In other words, section 30.06 can not be applied if the property is owned or leased by a Government entity, and it is not a place already prohibited under the other listed sections. (Court, Premises of a School, etc)
The key word here is 'exception', which means, they aren't even supposed to be able to arrest you for it, as they can for something that is a 'defense to prosecution'. They can post all the signs they want, that section of law is powerless on government owned or leased property.

The basic premise here, is that the State Government trusts you to carry a handgun once they issue a permit, so why would the same government then try to deny your right to carry anywhere it has authority? It makes no sense. They trust you at first, but then change their mind later? The State says you can carry a handgun, and it doesn't want any random pleeb below it trying to undermine it's preemption authority by placing signs on government property under their control, so the above section exists to prevent that.

dicion

This is a good resource, provided the signs are properly posted.

Exceptions to the first post:
A properly worded/sized 30.06 sign on government owned or leased property: Yes, you can carry!
An improperly posted 51% Sign on a non 51% location: Yes, you can carry! (Check TABC Licence to be sure!) <- Seems that this is quite common.
A 51% Location without a non 51% Sign posted, or no 51% Sign posted: It is a defense to prosecution that the sign was not posted properly.

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 6 matches

Re: Signs for the CHLer

Re: Signs for the CHLer

Re: Signs for the CHLer

Re: Signs for the CHLer

Re: Signs for the CHLer

Re: Signs for the CHLer