TexasCHLforum.com

The problem as I see it is this, 30.06 says nothing about signs being posted at every single entry point. It also uses the term "SIGN". Criminal tresspass 30.05 gives definitions on Entry, but again is vague in saying that every entrance must have a sign.

On property no tresspassing signs or paint marks according to 30.05 can be posted no more than 1000 feet apart. I could technically enter the land between 1000 foot signage and never see one, but I don't think it would hold up in court.

Although I think that every entrance should be posted with a 30.06 sign, I see nothing in the law that says it needs to be only that a "SIGN" needs to be conspiciously posted on the property.

I am not trying to start an argument only pointing out that a prosecutor could make the argument that a legal "SIGN" was posted on the property in a conspicious manner for the public to see.

IANAL but I find that I just wish these laws could be written in simple English for all to understand clearly. I would think the intent of the law was to have every entrance marked, but I can also see where it can be twisted around to say that every entrance doesn't have to be posted.

I know that Grapevine mills is posted at some locations so I will not carry there. I for one don't feel like spending my hard earned money or time arguing the fact that I came in a entrance that wasn't marked. I don't know who the burden of proof would be on in a case like this, but I would think if they didn't have video survalence of the entrance that you came in, it would be hard to prove your point.

I think I will just err on the side of caution and let someone else be the test case.