Attack on your character? My comment was directed to your anti-LTC suggestion and it neither stated nor implied anything about your character. Save the crocodile tears for some far more gullible.Bitterclinger wrote:Mr. Cotton, I'm not sure how you were able to misconstrue anything I posted into something that would warrant your harsh and insulting comparison of me to the tyrant Bloomberg. If you would care to elaborate on the point in my post where you became confused, I would be happy to correct your misunderstanding. I have reviewed this post, as well as my previous posts and I can not for the life of me understand what I did to provoke such an attack on my character. I am deeply offend by your calumny, and in a bygone era, I would be compelled to visit your countenance with the back of my glove.Charles L. Cotton wrote:That's up to you, but since the other bitterclinger has posted something that only Bloomberg could love, you may want to change your username. When I read the OP's post, I thought it was you and wondered what in the world had gotten into you!Bitter Clinger wrote:The two "Bitter Clingers" are completely independent of one another as wellTexasTornado wrote:The two signs are completely independent of one another. 30.06 only covers concealed carry while 30.07 only covers open.adl713 wrote:Question:
If there is only a valid 30.06 sign posted, is open carry still permissible on the premises? Going further, by not posting a valid 30.07 sign has the owner invalidated their 30.06 signage?
If the 30.06 is the only one posted, legally you may open carry on the premises; however, more than likely you will be given a verbal notice that carry is not permitted.
In the interest of full disclosure, the OP did register the name before I did, and I did not search to see if there was anyone who had already claimed it. I will leave it up to the moderators to tell me if there is a need for me to change my handle.
Chas.
Since our Members have already responded to your comment, there's no reason for me to repeat it. I will add this to the mix. Your clear and unequivocal statement regarding signs is set out below. You want to make it much easier for a business to prohibit both open and concealed carry.
- Bitterclinger wrote: "Not to mention the fact that both signs are the same kind of defacto waste of space as software EULAs which are invariably read and observed by absolutely no one. They subject business owners to unnecessary controversy and expense, to say nothing of the legal implications if they fail to post the proper sign. We are the only people for whom it makes any legal difference, so couldn't we get by with something like an unobtrusive state seal with a simple 30.06 or 30.07 on it?
Anti-gun groups in Texas want to do precisely what you suggest; i.e. gut §§30.06 and 30.07 and revert to small, easy to miss no guns signs. An entirely new Bloomberg Texas anti-gun group was successful in getting a rabid anti-gun Democrat to hold a "hearing" on this very issue just a few weeks ago and they have vowed to get the Texas Association of Business (TAB) to support such a bill in the 2017 Legislative Session. Ergo the Bloomberg reference to your anti-gun, anti-LTC suggestion.
I have not become confused and as to your "bygone era" comment, "Let not him who straps on his armor boast himself as he who takes it off."
If you want to stay on the Forum, consider your words more carefully.
Chas.