Search found 3 matches

Return to “Repeal the 30.06 law”

by MeMelYup
Fri May 23, 2014 5:07 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Repeal the 30.06 law
Replies: 136
Views: 30809

Re: Repeal the 30.06 law

BenGoodLuck wrote:
Charles L. Cotton wrote:
BenGoodLuck wrote:We need 30.06 now for the same reason we needed it in 1997. Without it, any no-gun sign will be effective and thousands of locations CHLs can currently carry will be off-limits over night. Training wheels? Really? No, it's Hoover Dam preventing a flood of generic "no guns" decals from decorating doors as they did from 1995 until Sept. 1, 1997.

Not even Texas gun owners, much less the 97% of Texans without a CHL, will ever support stripping a private property owner of his/her ability to bar armed CHLs from their property and the Texas Legislature will never pass such a bill. (I realize your position is that they can still bar people by asking them to leave, but that's a non-starter.) There is absolutely no chance it would pass and it doesn't matter how other states handle trespass matters. We may as well discuss how life would be on Mars. As I mentioned earlier, I couldn't even get support for the concept that owners of commercial property open to the public shouldn't be able to bar armed CHLs.

Your discrimination argument won't fly in the legislature, or in court. CHLs are not a protected class so there's no legal discrimination.

Chas.
Do you mean that without 30.06, people could rely on 30.05? Was 30.06 passed specifically because 30.05 allows for oral or written notice of any kind? If that's the case, I see your point. Can you explain what 30.05 Section f means?

(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was forbidden; and
(2) the person was carrying a concealed handgun and a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a concealed handgun.

It seems that 30.05 allowed for someone with a CHL to enter the property despite having received notice.
I believe that 30.05 was added to for support of 30.06. Originally a gun buster or any other type sign was all it needed to deprive a CHL from carrying inside a business.

If that part of 30.05 was deleted, 30.06 would be useless and any no gun sign would be valid.
by MeMelYup
Fri May 23, 2014 4:05 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Repeal the 30.06 law
Replies: 136
Views: 30809

Re: Repeal the 30.06 law

rtschl wrote:IANAL... but if I would be curious if lawsuit against a business where an incident happened in a 30.06 posted business could be successfully sued under something similar to the Attractive Nuisance Doctrine. Gun free zones are an enticement for criminal activity.

Ron
Wouldn't it need to be under negligence?
by MeMelYup
Fri May 23, 2014 3:07 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Repeal the 30.06 law
Replies: 136
Views: 30809

Re: Repeal the 30.06 law

Personally I like 30.06, I wish it had gone a little farther. I would like it to make businesses that post the sign, responsible for the health and welfare of the individuals while in the business or parking lot. At this time if I were in a posted business, my car was broken into and gun stolen while parked in their lot, they claim no responsibility. If I am robbed at gun or knife point while in their business, they they can claim no responsibility. It would require me to prove negligence on their part in a court of law to get a favorable response from the business and the court costs would much more than the value of the loss. There would be another stolen firearm on the street.

Return to “Repeal the 30.06 law”