ScottDLS wrote: ↑Sun Nov 01, 2020 1:28 pmIf the building in question wasn't a hospital, then I would disagree with you. If the sign is non-compliant, the penalty should you be unjustly convicted would be a class C misdemeanor with a $200 fine. The "record" would be similar to the record than many of us have for class C traffic offenses. Particularly for concealed carry, the chances of being discovered and having to defend oneself against an unjust charge, are minimal. A hospital, with the possibility of an unjustified Class A charge (46.035) to defend against would weigh somewhat more on my decision.ELB wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:57 am I would not pin my freedom and criminal non-record on the belief that a 30.06/07 sign that doesn't exactly match the statutory text would spare me from prosecution, nor even conviction. I think appellate courts would be more likely to embrace the law exactly as written, but that's expensive and takes time. If at all possible spend $$ elsewhere, and if not, well, well-concealed is well-concealed.
I try to follow the law, but I am not going to go out of my way to avoid the possibility of an incorrect conviction on a Class C misdemeanor. I put intentionally disarming in the face of a non-compliant sign in the same category as always going 10 mph under the speed limit in case the LEO's radar is not calibrated correctly, and a whole host of other things I could do to unduly limit the free exercise of my rights as I go about my day.
I also agree with those saying that we should avoid places where we believe that ownership is anti-gun on any level. But that's more of a philisophical discussion than a legal one.
And let me also say that I am extremely pleased to see that no one has suggested telling management that the sign is not enforceable as written.