TexasCHLforum.com

Soccerdad1995 wrote:Interesting article, but not really on point, IMHO.

In the Erik Scott case, Costco had no policy against guns (they still don't BTW), so this wasn't a case of someone walking past any signage.

Correct that Costco had no signs. So poor Erik Scott had no notice. In the case of a standalone 30.06 sign, we have practical if not legal notice that open carry will not likely be welcomed. Who among us wants to risk setting in motion a sequence of events similar to what happened to Scott? Some may, and they are free to do so. I will not.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:That case is an example of extreme negligence on the part of the LEO's that shot him, in my opinion.

No doubt, but Scott's still dead. "The LEO's were negligent" is a heckuva thing to have on your tombstone.

Before deciding to make a point with people who most likely don't want you in their premises, consider this:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/cops-gun-dow ... g-firearm/

Technically, 30.06 restricts only concealed carry, and 30.07 restricts only open carry. But if you see a 30.06 sign, you can be pretty sure they don't want open carry either. How you behave depends on whether you want to push a technicality or avoid a confrontation.