Meanwhile, over at the 3006 site...

[BluHog]

Was looking at the map on Texas3006.com (as most here probably know, the map pinpoints locations identified by users where 30.06 signs - or attempts at 30.06 signs - are posted across the State).

I noticed a LOT of the locations were hospitals. Section 46.035 (b) (4) of the Penal Code says (in part), "A license holder commits and offense if the license holder... carries a handgun... on the premises of a hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or on the premises of a nursing home licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, unless the license holder has written authorization of the hospital or nursing home administration, as appropriate."

So, isn't a 30.06 sign redundant at a hospital?

[casp625]

Was looking at the map on Texas3006.com (as most here probably know, the map pinpoints locations identified by users where 30.06 signs - or attempts at 30.06 signs - are posted across the State).

I noticed a LOT of the locations were hospitals. Section 46.035 (b) (4) of the Penal Code says (in part), "A license holder commits and offense if the license holder... carries a handgun... on the premises of a hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or on the premises of a nursing home licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, unless the license holder has written authorization of the hospital or nursing home administration, as appropriate."

So, isn't a 30.06 sign redundant at a hospital?

Scroll down a little further:

(i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.

[Pawpaw]

You have to read the whole paragraph, including all the little subparagraphs.

Subpragraph (i) means that if a hospital, amusement park, church, or governmental meeting isn't posted, it is NOT off-limits.

Your instructor should've pounded this home, but it's hard to remember everything.

(You're not the first nor will you be the last to make that mistake.)

[BluHog]

Ah! Caught me sleeping. I knew of that provision in reference to places of worship because I had THAT argument with a friend who'd earned his CHL some time before I did. And I've brought it to the attention of many friends who hold CHLs. I'm in church twice a week but rarely in a hospital so I guess my mind didn't lock in on that part of it (and my wife works in a hospital so slap me twice).

Thanks!

[Jago668]

I know why exceptions are put in the way they are, but I still wish the law could just be amended and have certain sections cut out. So instead of seeing you can't carry in a hospital, and then having to look and see that an exception was made to that; just remove that you can't carry in a hospital part.

[Beiruty]

I know why exceptions are put in the way they are, but I still wish the law could just be amended and have certain sections cut out. So instead of seeing you can't carry in a hospital, and then having to look and see that an exception was made to that; just remove that you can't carry in a hospital part.

"a cleanup bill" would fix that.

[JALLEN]

As a long ago mentor often insisted, "if you are going to read at all, read it all!"

The law making process forces stuff like this. In the heat of battle, on the floor and in smoke filled rooms, sometimes opponents can be "bought" by adding or deleting some onerous provisions of a bill, and language is added or deleted accordingly. The proponents aren't willing to weaken their language which might then be misinterpreted by courts, so they stick in exceptions, except as provided by law! The result is sausage that nobody really likes but gets votes to pass. What else really matters?

[casp625]

I know why exceptions are put in the way they are, but I still wish the law could just be amended and have certain sections cut out. So instead of seeing you can't carry in a hospital, and then having to look and see that an exception was made to that; just remove that you can't carry in a hospital part.

But the penalties are different now for 30.06 violation versus 46.035

[Pawpaw]

I know why exceptions are put in the way they are, but I still wish the law could just be amended and have certain sections cut out. So instead of seeing you can't carry in a hospital, and then having to look and see that an exception was made to that; just remove that you can't carry in a hospital part.

"a cleanup bill" would fix that.

HB 308 would've done it even better.

[Jilly]

I was in a medical office building yesterday which is attached to a hospital.
As I approached the building I wasn't sure where the door was to the medical offices. I could clearly see the entrance to the hospital.

I saw a door far off in the distance and assumed that this was the door to the medical offices.
As I approached I could see the clearly posted 30.06 signage.
I returned to my car to secure my handgun.

I returned to this door and the door was locked.
Locked as in a door that was not regularly used, as it was 11am and it should not be locked.

I then realized that the entrance to the medical offices was through the front door of the hospital.
There was no 30.06 on the front door of the hospital.

So, I have a question and a comment.

1. Question: Could I have legally carried in this building?

2. Comment: Is it possible that a business would knowingly improperly post a 30.06 sign?
the sign is there, which would appease someone who is nervous about hand guns being carried.
And an improperly posted sign could (unknown to the uneducated public) allow the carry.

Thank you.
Very thankful to have a place to bring questions.

[TVegas]

Could you have carried still? Maybe, but there is no case law to support you. The 30.06 statute says signs must be at all entrances, but you also saw a compliant 30.06 sign in general. You did receive effective notice, but the building may not have been in compliance. My opinion is that you probably shouldn't test it.

Would a business purposely be out of compliance? Maybe, but if they just wanted to appease people, they would more than likely just post a gun-buster sign. Most people are not educated on Texas gun laws. If they even know what a 30.06 sign is, then posting one would likely be for insurance reasons or because they want to keep us out.

Just my opinion!

[JP171]

Could you have carried still? Maybe, but there is no case law to support you. The 30.06 statute says signs must be at all entrances, but you also saw a compliant 30.06 sign in general. You did receive effective notice, but the building may not have been in compliance. My opinion is that you probably shouldn't test it.

Would a business purposely be out of compliance? Maybe, but if they just wanted to appease people, they would more than likely just post a gun-buster sign. Most people are not educated on Texas gun laws. If they even know what a 30.06 sign is, then posting one would likely be for insurance reasons or because they want to keep us out.

Just my opinion!

You are incorrect in that portion in red, it does NOT require that 30.06 is at ALL entrances it is however part of 30.07

[TVegas]

Could you have carried still? Maybe, but there is no case law to support you. The 30.06 statute says signs must be at all entrances, but you also saw a compliant 30.06 sign in general. You did receive effective notice, but the building may not have been in compliance. My opinion is that you probably shouldn't test it.

Would a business purposely be out of compliance? Maybe, but if they just wanted to appease people, they would more than likely just post a gun-buster sign. Most people are not educated on Texas gun laws. If they even know what a 30.06 sign is, then posting one would likely be for insurance reasons or because they want to keep us out.

Just my opinion!

You are incorrect in that portion in red, it does NOT require that 30.06 is at ALL entrances it is however part of 30.07

You are correct! I forgot about that difference

[nightmare69]

I was in a medical office building yesterday which is attached to a hospital.
As I approached the building I wasn't sure where the door was to the medical offices. I could clearly see the entrance to the hospital.

I saw a door far off in the distance and assumed that this was the door to the medical offices.
As I approached I could see the clearly posted 30.06 signage.
I returned to my car to secure my handgun.

I returned to this door and the door was locked.
Locked as in a door that was not regularly used, as it was 11am and it should not be locked.

I then realized that the entrance to the medical offices was through the front door of the hospital.
There was no 30.06 on the front door of the hospital.

So, I have a question and a comment.

1. Question: Could I have legally carried in this building?

2. Comment: Is it possible that a business would knowingly improperly post a 30.06 sign?
the sign is there, which would appease someone who is nervous about hand guns being carried.
And an improperly posted sign could (unknown to the uneducated public) allow the carry.

Thank you.
Very thankful to have a place to bring questions.

IMO, once you see the sign you have been given effective notice.

Our local mall has close to 15 public entrances. Only 3 are posted. Our CHL instructor said he still carries there and it's legal because he was under some fantasy that all entrances must be posted to be valid.

[jed]

Our local mall has maybe 3 entrances not counting several stores with an outside entrances. I have 30.06 app on my phone that says this mall is posted. I have not check any doors leading into the mall itself. I have only been in Penney's twice from an outside entrance. There was no sign of any kind. Seems to me that Penney's (or any other store) leases space for the mall management. So, does that mean the management of the mall controls the entrances to all stores? I think carrying into these stores with no signs is fine as long as I don't leave that store and enter the mall itself.