TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Be safe; if someone tells you no guns, then don’t go in. I have never heard of anyone being given a verbal warning, but it probably does happen on rare occasions.

This was what I was thinking as well...

Funny how the law thats suppose to work "for" you, works "against" you in certain situations...

gigag04 wrote:I think effective ORAL notice should be a direct reading out loud of 30.06 addressed to US.

THAT would be funny.

You beat me to the punch...

Braden wrote:Stevie, perhaps Charles can shed some more light on this, but it is my understanding that verbal instructions to leave (or not to carry onto a premises) is considered effective notice under 30.06. I could be wrong, but consider the following:

30.06 (b) states:

"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."

It goes on to define what "written communication" is, but it never defines what oral communication is. To me, that means that if someone with the authority to act for the owner (like the guy searching bags) tells me that I cannot carry a handgun on the premises then it becomes unlawful for me to do so. If I am reading 30.06 correctly, carrying on the premises after being told by a person with authority to act for the owner tells me not to would be a Class A Misdemeanor. The only exception to that, as I understand it, would be if the property was owned or leased by a government entity....in which case 30.06 would not apply.

Am I wrong in my logic?

I do see where you're coming from on this...But would you think the "oral" notice would have to comply with some form of official format or verbage??? I have not heard of anything to that idea...Not sure if its ever been implemented or become a real issue...

All I am getting at, is that I think that a facility that does not post a 30.06 sign (written notification), and is not on the forbidden list already enumerated in the law...But conducts "bag searches", and may even have metal detectors, and wanding, to screen people coming into the facility cannot legally (bind you) tell you: "You can't bring a guuuunnn in here!"

Should the "oral" notification officially be the actual 30.06 statue read to you right then and there??? In English and Spanish??? Wouldn't that be a hoot to see people trying to read that thing, to one of us, if that became the official lawful procedure???

I know I am wrong (I've known that all along), but there are too many negatives (working against our community) that support the further eroding of our basic right to keep and bear arms, for whatever reason we feel is necessary...

I believe it should be a priority for our community to start turning the tables on the restrictive side of the argument, by making it extremely hard for their agenda to implement and enforce un-Constitutional restrictions and laws against us...

Put the burn on them if they want to get what they want...

Just my crazy idea...

Braden wrote:I don't fully understand what you're asking, but I do agree that you should still be able to carry even in a bag if you have a CHL. There was a Harris County Sheriff deputy standing off to the side of where the guy was doing bag searches. If I saw they were doing bag searches and I KNEW I had a gun in my bag then I would go directly to him instead of going to the Sea World guy doing the searches. I would THINK that if you explained the situation to him first....then let him explain it to the search dude....then things would be okay. Of course, the Sea World search dude could tell you that they don't allow firearms....which would be considered effective (verbal) notice under 30.06....which would then make it illegal for you to carry.

Your best bet would be to keep it on your body and not in a bag.

Ok, I accept your take on this, no problemo...

And I agree with the "keeping it on your body" idea...

But if you did not have that option, and keeping the weapon concealed and secure (reletive term) in a handbag or other bag type container was the only other option...Why would a search of that bag nullify your ability to maintain a modem of control over that weapon???

Even under 30.06, which I believe has to be posted, not verbally instructed...Becasue why would a facility that doesn't post the 30.06 signage, but give you a proper verbal recitation of the statute be necessary at that point...

A security person (in my opinion) cannot say upon discovering a weapon properly under the control of a CHL holder that, "You can't bring a gun in here!", and then realize that that is not a proper "verbal" notice and then recite the actual statute and expect that to be binding...

I am certainly not trying to skirt or parse words...I am just hypothisizing that if you have to concent to a "bag search", and your "surprise" is discovered...Of course they can have a fit about it, but if the facility is not a restricted place noted in the CHL law, and it is not posted with the 30.06 sign, a verbal notice would not be binding as previously worded above...They should not even be allowed to pull a "mulligan", and cite the actual 30.06 statute, even as a desparate back-up to keep you out at that point...

Never mind that section 30.05, may come into play at that point, possibly...Thats the Trespass statute right???

I'm not saying this to aggravate a discussion...Just trying to see if anyone sees what I am putting on the table to discuss...

I'm also not trying to encourage the challenging of this law...I am just trying to expose potential problems with it, and see if there is a need to clean it up a bit, so that hypothetical situations like this (however unlikely to happen) do not become a real problem...

Matter of fact...If ya'll live in the Houston area, I would invite you to a Clear Lake Republican Meeting...Thats on the 12th (next Tuesday???)...

Jerry Patterson himself will be addressing the club that evening...I think some would like to meet him and hear what he has to say about what he has going on in State politics these days...He's not a regular speaker, so this is a special deal...

We meet at the Clear Lake City of Houston Courthouse Annex...

I'll go get the actual address tomorrow and post it if anyone is interested...Or not...

I know its off a side street off of Bay Area Blvd...Just past El Camino...You can't miss it if your that close...

Braden wrote:

Suckhow wrote:I also was a Seaworld with my girlfriend on July 2nd. No 30.06 sign, but I wasnt carrying. It was sooooo freaking hot that day it was ridiculous. Crowded as heck too.

That's the same day I was there. Were you the fat dude in the Speedo??

It was definitely warm outside....but at least there was plenty of shade to help stay out of the direct sunlight. That made it pretty tolerable, if not pleasant, most of the time.....even though my sweaty, long pant wearing in-laws would strongly disagree with me on that statement.

I am not fat...I am big boned...

And as far as wearing a speedo...Well lets just say that I'd fit right in with the euro-trash crowd on some of those beaches in the Med...

Charles can attest to my svelt-ness...

Braden wrote:No metal detectors. They were doing bag searches, but that wouldn't be a problem unless you're carrying a gun in a bag.

This is your fault for my previous post...

Lets say for the sake of argument...

That some facility was conducting "bag searches"...

And that they were not per-say "banning" the possession of a firearm on their property...(strange, I know, so why search??? But thats another tangent)

You have a bag, and in that bag you are carrying a firearm...(never mind why, at this point, and not directly on your person)...

They have not posted the dreaded 30.06 sign that sets up that force field of gun repellent to keep you from carrying legally on that property...

The event or facility, IS NOT covered under any other US Code, or CFR or any State law prohibiting the carrying of a firearm...

You are licenced to carry, but choose to carry (concealed) in an item that some "security" personel are compelled to examine to allow entry...

Of course you are licenced, and can carry in any manner considered concealed, if thats the law...

I'm of the thought in this conveluted, and whacked out senario, that you should still be allowed entrance, and patronage to this facility even at that point of discovery...

Think about this more from a standpoint of being a woman...You might not necessarily carry in a holstered condition on your person...

But if your one of those who carry a purse or some other "bag" type device like a casual backpack, etc etc...

Obviously, it may not be the best tactical way to carry, but in some instances a male or female may choose to carry a firearm in this manner...

I probably should have, and may consider splitting this off on another thread/topic...I just was reading the comments here and this popped into the noggin'...

So I start typing...You know the drill...

What are your thoughts on something like this...