Whole Foods in Lakewood (Dallas)-unenforceable 30.06

[thetexan]

As I understand the law, the gun buster keeps out OC of long guns. Correct? 30.06 isn't valid, but I will still vote with my feet.

Where do you get that please.

tex

[cb1000rider]

Assuming it's private property (like Whole Foods) the gun buster sign could be considered effective notice that you were asked to leave (if openly armed). I would assume it could set you up for criminal trespass.

That being said, I know that in at least one OC state, a gun buster sign does not legally constitute effective notice and you actually need to be asked to leave before you can be issued a criminal trespass citation.

The way I look at it is that I have a right to carry a firearm. My right to carry a firearm does not necessarily stomp on the right of the public property owner to set the rules on that private property.

[thetexan]

What ought to be isn't the law. Here in texas it takes two things to effect 30.06, lack of effective consent.....and.....correct 30.06 notification. If either of these two elements are not present you have not been prohibited from carrying at that location (unless it's one of the prohibited locations).

If that notification is in writing (either sigh or document) the criteria is exact and precise. If it is done verbally there is no specificity. "Take your gun and leave" is notification.

Tex

[Rex B]

I usually advise people to not ignore any sign, as they all may be prosecuted by a spiteful DA. I think you will win when it is the old gun busters sign, even at the first trial, but there is no guarantee. I have a lot of confidence in appellate judges following the exact law, but even that is not as clear-cut as it could be. So, know the law, know the possible consequences, and make an informed decision for your self.

Ask Rick Perry if one can be prosecuted for doing something that is perfectly legal.