30.06 signs not in compliance with State law

[jbarn]

I am not an attorney and my opinion is is worth what it is paid for, but I think people who measure the letters on 30.06 signs are taking a huge risk.

30.06 does require one be given notice in order to be in violation. It then goes on to read that " a person receives notice if......."

It does not read that a person only receives notice if....., nor does if read "if and only if".

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
(c) In this section:
(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
(2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(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.

IMO, it is gray area at best. Could a prosecutor argue that a sign with 3/4 inch tall letters constitute notice? Especially if it can be proven you saw the sign because the owner saw you standing there taking a picture of the sign or measuring the letters with your ruler?

The code does not say that "notice is defined as......".

You are also gambling that a LEO called to the scene or that 6 strangers will agree with your point of view, with your freedom and license riding on your wager.

Just food for thought.

These blue parts seem pretty clear to me.

They are clear. It is the parts I highlighted in red that concerns me. The law does not say that is the ONLY way you can be given notice. But again, it is just me. I don't measure signs or try to find ways the signs are wrong.

[MoJo]

My opinion of No Guns Signs. There are few places that are posted that I HAVE to do business with.

[JP171]

This question really needs an answer. There are probably more than a few individuals willing to challenge the issue in court; however, there are probably no lawyers willing to take the case pro bono?

The problem is how the people willing to be a test case for non-compliant 30.06 signs can challenge it in court without also violating the failure to conceal law. Meanwhile I'll take my chances and obey the letter and spirit of the law with a clear conscience.

there is no longer a failure to conceal in texas law it is now intentional display so no such thing to violate

All of the LEO's know this, do they?

meh! I doubt it but then they don't know all of them anyway we have seen that here time and time again and as is said concealed is concealed. so why the smart aleck question OG?

[android]

My ability to notice things on a cluttered store front is sometimes not very good.
I would never notice a sign with letters less than an inch tall.
I certainly would never notice a sign and then notice the letters were less than an inch tall.

[Oldgringo]

This question really needs an answer. There are probably more than a few individuals willing to challenge the issue in court; however, there are probably no lawyers willing to take the case pro bono?

The problem is how the people willing to be a test case for non-compliant 30.06 signs can challenge it in court without also violating the failure to conceal law. Meanwhile I'll take my chances and obey the letter and spirit of the law with a clear conscience.

there is no longer a failure to conceal in texas law it is now intentional display so no such thing to violate

All of the LEO's know this, do they?

meh! I doubt it but then they don't know all of them anyway we have seen that here time and time again and as is said concealed is concealed. so why the smart aleck question OG?

It was intended to be a thought provoking, not a 'smart aleck', question, JP71. Frankly, I could not care less what you do but do wonder why would you take offense at the question?

[JP171]

This question really needs an answer. There are probably more than a few individuals willing to challenge the issue in court; however, there are probably no lawyers willing to take the case pro bono?

The problem is how the people willing to be a test case for non-compliant 30.06 signs can challenge it in court without also violating the failure to conceal law. Meanwhile I'll take my chances and obey the letter and spirit of the law with a clear conscience.

there is no longer a failure to conceal in texas law it is now intentional display so no such thing to violate

All of the LEO's know this, do they?

meh! I doubt it but then they don't know all of them anyway we have seen that here time and time again and as is said concealed is concealed. so why the smart aleck question OG?

It was intended to be a thought provoking, not a 'smart aleck', question, JP71. Why would you take offense?

ok I can accept that, it seemed a bit snarky that's all. yes I understand that not all officer would know the laws have changed as a lot of them don't know the law without changes, at times we can barely keep up with the changes and what they mean.

[C-dub]

I am not an attorney and my opinion is is worth what it is paid for, but I think people who measure the letters on 30.06 signs are taking a huge risk.

30.06 does require one be given notice in order to be in violation. It then goes on to read that " a person receives notice if......."

It does not read that a person only receives notice if....., nor does if read "if and only if".

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
(c) In this section:
(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
(2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(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.

IMO, it is gray area at best. Could a prosecutor argue that a sign with 3/4 inch tall letters constitute notice? Especially if it can be proven you saw the sign because the owner saw you standing there taking a picture of the sign or measuring the letters with your ruler?

The code does not say that "notice is defined as......".

You are also gambling that a LEO called to the scene or that 6 strangers will agree with your point of view, with your freedom and license riding on your wager.

Just food for thought.

These blue parts seem pretty clear to me.

They are clear. It is the parts I highlighted in red that concerns me. The law does not say that is the ONLY way you can be given notice. But again, it is just me. I don't measure signs or try to find ways the signs are wrong.

There are other ways to be notified, but if it is a sign then this part is clear.