TexasCHLforum.com

It's unlikely that the very few licensed folk would cross a legitimate sign would be caught if their gun were properly concealed.

The key word is legitimate. I'm referring to signs that don't meet all the requirements of the law. I do agree that us licensed folk would as a group obey said legitimate signs, and 99% of infractions are accidental when they do occur.

For example, look in the comments for Sunny's 3344 Chimney Rock Rd. I posted a picture of their sign. Not valid IMHO because they plastered another sign on top of it, mostly obscuring the English and partially the Spanish. But if they hadn't covered it up, it would be valid.

While these two were civil not criminal cases, I can offer some food for thought. I can't get in to specifics, but I know of two cases.

In one, a foreclosure notice was sent with a return receipt requested. The receipt had the 9 digit zip code. The last 4 digits were wrong. Foreclosee (or post office) did return the receipt, so it got to him/her. The foreclosee then fought and the foreclosure was thrown out due to the zip code error. To us non-lawyers, it was not material and didn't have any effect on the notice, but it was enough for the judge to toss it.

Second case, the forecloser was successfully sued by the person living there because the wrong building number was on the notice. Address was right, and she wasn't even on the deed, yet still won based on that slight error.

While I know of no precedent for 30.06/30.07/51% signs, there are other precedents for minor, insignificant, errors costing people their case. I also consider that in all the years at least 30.06 has been around, there are no precedents. Why not? I have to believe that it has to have come up by now. I can think of two reasons:

1 - The DA's look at these cases, realize they'll likely lose, and don't prosecute, or lose in court.
2 - No LTC who has lost has bothered to appeal. Since it was a class A misdemeanor, which is just below a felony conviction, that seems less likely.