Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

[MasterOfNone]

In Longview, Texas, Good Shepherd Medical Center is posted with a correct sign. The land and buildings are owned by Gregg County, but leased to Good Shepherd. Is the sign enforceable? The emergency room entrance has a metal detector and is staffed by Longview PD.

Ask the police, cuz they're the ones who will make the call. I will be very surprised if they don't tell you that weapons are forbidden on the premises.

This is the same as UTMB Galveston and the Texas Medical Center, both of which are state-owned and operated.

This is one of those situations where you might beat the rap but not the ride, if detected.

- Jim

But, the government exception to 30.06 states:
[quote="30.06(e)](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.

If a "Medical Center" is a "Hospital," then it is in fact a place prohibited by 46.035(b)(4). So it seems they could charge you under 46.035 or 30.06.

[/quote]

Better read farther down 46.035 to (i). See the post above.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
Of course I read al of 46.035 before posting. A previous poster said the medical center has a compliant 30.06 sign. And the part 30.06 I highlighted indicates that 30.06 is enforceable in those places listed in 46.035. As Jim pointed out, this case is the same as a government meeting on government property.

[El_Capitan]

You guys should think about what your doing here. By posting pictures of 30.06 signs and pointing out they are NOT compliant to section 30.06 you are letting those places know that they need to change their signs in order for them to be compliant to 30.06. If you see a 30.06 sign that is not compliant to the 30.06 section just carry right on past it and let everyone "think" the sign is keeping us CHL people out.
Some businesses may post a non-compliant 30.06 on purpose. Think about it. The anti CHL crowd will see the sign and think oh good no guns allowed in here but a CHL holder will see the sign know it is a non-compliant sign and will be able to carry legally. Then the smart business owner gets business from both the anti CHL crowd and the CHL crowd without taking flak from either side.

[bizarrenormality]

You guys should think about what your doing here. By posting pictures of 30.06 signs and pointing out they are NOT compliant to section 30.06 you are letting those places know that they need to change their signs in order for them to be compliant to 30.06. If you see a 30.06 sign that is not compliant to the 30.06 section just carry right on past it and let everyone "think" the sign is keeping us CHL people out.

Have you read the last paragraph of the 30.06 law about government property?

[El_Capitan]

Yes I did. Carry past one and you may end up in jail. I think that all local police should HAVE to contact Texas DPS by law when dealing with the 30.06 code and only the Texas DPS should be allowed to enforce the 30.06 Code. As various local police deparments and municpalities have shown thier lack of knowledge or thier complete disreguard of Texas law concerning the 30.06 Code.

[Keith B]

Yes I did. Carry past one and you may end up in jail. I think that all local police should HAVE to contact Texas DPS by law when dealing with the 30.06 code and only the Texas DPS should be allowed to enforce the 30.06 Code. As various local police deparments and municpalities have shown thier lack of knowledge or thier complete disreguard of Texas law concerning the 30.06 Code.

Yeah, but they could also end up with a wrongful arrest lawsuit on thier hands. Bottom line, they have to obey the law just like anyone else and if they don't there can be consequences for them too.

[chasfm11]

Yeah, but they could also end up with a wrongful arrest lawsuit on thier hands. Bottom line, they have to obey the law just like anyone else and if they don't there can be consequences for them too.

I don't see how this could work. Let's suppose that I were willing to be the test case (I'm not.) I strap on and walk past the 30.06 sign at Grapefest days in Grapevine. I'd have to do something to draw the attention of the an LEO. If I did, I'd expect to go down the "intentional failure to conceal" route and completely by-pass the sign problem, even if all I did was verbally talk to an officer about carrying my gun.

The only way that I could see to specifically address the sign would be to take pictures of it and then file suit against the city. I'm guessing that the city attorney has already thought about that and is willing to take the risk of that happening. Same for Irving. I suspect that the outcome of a suit would be for the judge to tell the city that they did the wrong thing and not to do it again. And then the suit could be filed again the next year when (not if) they did it again. That is a pretty expensive process for very little gain. How am I seeing it wrong?

[bayouhazard]

If were going to assume cops who don't know or don't care about the law you could be arrested for carrying in a grocery store with the blue sign, for carrying a BUG, or for accidentally printing.

r

[RPB]

Declaratory Judgement/Injunctive Relief Texas

http://www.dallasinjunctionlawyer.com/TRCP_680.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.juistpc.com/papers/injunc.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

By posting, I am not vouching that those are up to date.... or not ... I was just thinking out loud my layperson's thought.

My mind works like lightning .... a brilliant flash .... and then its gone ....

[Keith B]

Yeah, but they could also end up with a wrongful arrest lawsuit on thier hands. Bottom line, they have to obey the law just like anyone else and if they don't there can be consequences for them too.

I don't see how this could work. Let's suppose that I were willing to be the test case (I'm not.) I strap on and walk past the 30.06 sign at Grapefest days in Grapevine. I'd have to do something to draw the attention of the an LEO. If I did, I'd expect to go down the "intentional failure to conceal" route and completely by-pass the sign problem, even if all I did was verbally talk to an officer about carrying my gun.

The only way that I could see to specifically address the sign would be to take pictures of it and then file suit against the city. I'm guessing that the city attorney has already thought about that and is willing to take the risk of that happening. Same for Irving. I suspect that the outcome of a suit would be for the judge to tell the city that they did the wrong thing and not to do it again. And then the suit could be filed again the next year when (not if) they did it again. That is a pretty expensive process for very little gain. How am I seeing it wrong?

Grapefest is not a City owned venue (I don't think) and could possibly be posted. I was talking about a city owned building that was not otherwise off-limits, which is what this topic is about.

Scenario is that a city building is invalidly posted with a 30.06. I carry past the sign and SOMEHOW they determine I am carrying (not going into other charges or why they found out, let's just assume I was legal) and they charge me with criminal trespass. In this case, once I have proved that they can't legally post the building and the charges are dropped, THEN I am gonna be sure to file a civil suit to recoup time lost, legal fees and restitution for undue stress caused by the illegal arrest.

[JKTex]

Grapefest has nothing to do with local Gov. buildings as is the topic. Besides, Grapefest takes place largely on public streets and sidewalks, right?

Keith is right. And LEO's have resources for things like this, otherwise if LEA's allowed their officers to arrest based on what they "think" only, they'd be covered up with problems.

Some people just want to argue over assumptions and what if's. If you have something to prove, go out and prove it. We'll be waiting for your report back here.

[srothstein]

Yes I did. Carry past one and you may end up in jail. I think that all local police should HAVE to contact Texas DPS by law when dealing with the 30.06 code and only the Texas DPS should be allowed to enforce the 30.06 Code. As various local police deparments and municpalities have shown thier lack of knowledge or thier complete disreguard of Texas law concerning the 30.06 Code.

You obviously have a much higher opinion of DPS than I do. Contrary to popular belief, they are not the best cops in Texas, just one of the state police agencies with a really good reputation. With their primary duties, if I had a question about traffic laws or accident investigation, DPS is the first agency I would go with. But if the question involved how to handle a domestic disturbance or similar call, I would ask any municipal officer first. It the question was about hunting or fishing, a game warden would be the best choice, just as a TABC agent if it dealt with drinking laws. Even law enforcement comes with specialties sometimes.

When it comes to general criminal law, it depends as much on the trooper as it does any other officer. They have some good ones and some bad ones, just as any other department.

[speedsix]

...that's why I often encourage us all to know the law, instead of asking questions of folks who don't have their bacon in the trap...

[El_Capitan]

Yes I did. Carry past one and you may end up in jail. I think that all local police should HAVE to contact Texas DPS by law when dealing with the 30.06 code and only the Texas DPS should be allowed to enforce the 30.06 Code. As various local police deparments and municpalities have shown thier lack of knowledge or thier complete disreguard of Texas law concerning the 30.06 Code.

You obviously have a much higher opinion of DPS than I do. Contrary to popular belief, they are not the best cops in Texas, just one of the state police agencies with a really good reputation. With their primary duties, if I had a question about traffic laws or accident investigation, DPS is the first agency I would go with. But if the question involved how to handle a domestic disturbance or similar call, I would ask any municipal officer first. It the question was about hunting or fishing, a game warden would be the best choice, just as a TABC agent if it dealt with drinking laws. Even law enforcement comes with specialties sometimes.

When it comes to general criminal law, it depends as much on the trooper as it does any other officer. They have some good ones and some bad ones, just as any other department.

Hmmm.... maybe I am missing something. Who would be the first agency you would go with if you had questions about concealed carry laws and CHL?

[JKTex]

Hmmm.... maybe I am missing something. Who would be the first agency you would go with if you had questions about concealed carry laws and CHL?

Very good question.. the DPS here told several people that the generic "gun buster" sign at our local mall was sufficient notice under 30.06, even though the local police told people different, and the law even as written says different.

One reserve officer has been heard to state that ANYONE that he finds driving with a handgun in their car, if they don't have a CHL, they are going to jail..

The DPS or 1 supposed Officer?

Anyone can repeat rumor, make assumptions and what-if's but that doens't change the law or if it's by an LEO, doens't mean that an entire agency is a bone headed chest thumper with an authority complex. If, an Officer actually said it in context of being illegal as stated.

Know the law; it's your/our responsibility and risk, not theirs. And don't listen to bone headed comments, or enjoy getting a laugh from them.