TexasCHLforum.com

mr surveyor wrote:does the card or document have to have 1 inch block letters, English and Spanish, on contrasting colors?

Now, I wonder what the official defination of a card or document is? I would assume it would have to be a card or document hand delivered to the chl prior to entry, possibly on any sized media with any form of legible text?

surv

Nope, sub(A) doesn't specify a font or size, so I would assume as long as it was readable it could be business card size, or worse, printed on the back of your ticket.

DA "You didn't read both sides of your ticket, sir?"

ME "No, we were hurrying in and by the time we got into the darkened theater I couldn't see it. Besides who reads the back?"

DA "Your ticket is a legal contract, you should read the whole thing."

ME "I never even noticed that it was printed on the back."

DA "Well it is and your ignorance of that and the corresponding law is no excuse. Did you notice the hand lettered sheet of paper stuck to the inside of the ticket booth window?"

ME "Yes, but . . ."

DA "And you just chose to ignore it, in violation of the law?"

ME "But the sign doesn't . . ."

DA "That was not a sign, as specified in subpart (B) of the law, it was a document as specified in subpart (A)."

. . .

Jury "Guilty in the first degree, of sheer stupidity."

I don't even want to try to think about how it would work on appeal. It looks like a loophole in the law to me, I think that wording should either be eliminated or modified to include a requirement that the CHL holder be presented with the document or card and both parties sign for it.

The part that always bothers me about those "little" signs is that they may be held, by some activist judge, to meet 30.06 (c)(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, Govemment Code (concealed
handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed
handgun"; or


Note the "OR" at the end.

Yes, it's a "sign" that doesn't meet (B) but it is a "written communication" on a "document" with the right language, which seems to me to be a very large and inconvenient loophole to be used against someone who passes it.

I don't fehave any problems about passing gunbusters signs, or improperly posted signs, or 30.05 signs like those at Dallas Love Field, but that little document in the window gives me pause.