TexasCHLforum.com

viking1000 wrote:After January 1, if this happens, we should have a place to post those businesses that do not allow us in .
As well as those displaying signs, along with location. It should be front and center so they don't have to hunt for it .
We should have a form letter to send, from TEXAS CHL FORUM, explaining our posting of there place of business on our forum, as a we respectfully decline to patronize your establishment for the following reasons.
We could also include that we as CHL holders are the only ones who can openly carry a holstered pistol.
Or words to that effect.
Just throwing out a thought .
Maybe it will make then think .......Maybe........?

Sorry, but that's not coming from the Forum nor will there be such a list on the Forum. While I support not allowing businesses to prohibit concealed-carry by CHLs, open-carry and its impact on a business' customers is an entirely different matter. In my view, that's up to the property owner.

Chas.

rotor wrote:I honestly can't see this ever getting this far but would there be a bill for services rendered as they requested you to leave with a partially eaten meal?

No, unless the person walked past a 30.07 sign.

Chas.

harrycallahan wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I again urge everyone who decides to openly carry to be a statesman. If one is asked to leave by an owner, agent or employee of a property owner, it would be prudent to leave. If you ask for a supervisor, then you have legally refused to leave upon being asked to do so. This raises the offense from a Class C to a Class A misdemeanor. Yes, the Code provision requires that oral notice be given by the property owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner, but I would never try to rely a lack of authority as a defense. OCT is going to be doing this kind of thing and responsible gun owners must be viewed in stark contrast to those tactics.

Chas.

I agree with your statesman comment completely. However, I disagree with your assumption that asking for a manager creates an offense. I have no doubt you are, as I am too, tired of OCT's destructive antics and perhaps it is from there you are speaking. Respectfully I am not coming from that direction. If a busboy asks me to leave my steak dinner, I'll be happy to comply. Clearly I am not wanted. The reason I need to speak to someone in charge is not to argue my point, it is so that I may lawfully resolve the charges and leave.

I cannot conceive of a scenario where you would walk into a business establishment openly carrying a handgun and have enough time to incur a debt that must be paid, before being told to leave. In the unlikely event you did, you don't have to deal with a manager or other supervisor to pay your tab. You could also ask the person telling you to leave if you can pay your tab first.

While amended TPC §30.07 and new §30.07 do not refer to "immediately" leaving the property as is seen in the new airport security area defense (HB554), both Sections to refer to "subsequently failed to depart." It think the intent is clear; when told to get out, get out without delay and without arguing the point. I don't think any jury would buy the argument that you were wanting to see a manager so you could pay your tab.

Chas.

I again urge everyone who decides to openly carry to be a statesman. If one is asked to leave by an owner, agent or employee of a property owner, it would be prudent to leave. If you ask for a supervisor, then you have legally refused to leave upon being asked to do so. This raises the offense from a Class C to a Class A misdemeanor. Yes, the Code provision requires that oral notice be given by the property owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner, but I would never try to rely a lack of authority as a defense. OCT is going to be doing this kind of thing and responsible gun owners must be viewed in stark contrast to those tactics.

Chas.

jerry_r60 wrote:

Ruark wrote:It just crossed my mind that some places have the 3006 text etched into the glass. They're going to be ticked off at having to replace it because of a couple of changed words.

I've never seen one of these but it doesn't sound like that provides a "contrasting background".

I've seen a few and you're right, there is very little contrast. This is especially true when the sun is at certain angles.

Chas.

What's the new signage going to be? Big, ugly X 2!

Seriously, I must admit I never thought I'd see the day when the Legislature would pass a requirement for two signs. I am thrilled to have been wrong. Even the OCT bills that never got a hearing intentionally gutted TPC §30.06, but a lot of work by Alice and Tara pulled it off. Good work ladies.

Chas.