Ahhhh I see.apostate wrote:30.06(e) http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/d ... /PE.30.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;KWalk313000 wrote:Can you elaborate on why it is legal for him to ignore the sign? It looks valid to me. I'm the furthest from an expert as you can get though.
Search found 2 matches
Return to “30.06 sign looks correct, but is it legal?”
- Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:46 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: 30.06 sign looks correct, but is it legal?
- Replies: 16
- Views: 3942
Re: 30.06 sign looks correct, but is it legal?
- Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:34 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: 30.06 sign looks correct, but is it legal?
- Replies: 16
- Views: 3942
Re: 30.06 sign looks correct, but is it legal?
Can you elaborate on why it is legal for him to ignore the sign? It looks valid to me. I'm the furthest from an expert as you can get though.srothstein wrote:All of my answers are based solely on your description of the building and the photo.
It is legal for the city to post this sign. It is also legal for you to ignore the sign.
There is no law forbidding the city from posting any sign of this type that it so desires. This means that it is legal (as in not illegal) to post the sign. The law simply says the sign is not legally enforceable in certain cases. This means it is legal for you to ignore the sign (as in not illegal for a CHL to enter).
In addition there is the gray area question of whether or not white letters on clear or tinted glass meet the requirement for contrasting colors. Since the sign is not enforceable anyway, I do not wish to debate this part, just pointing out that there are conflicting opinions on it.