TexasCHLforum.com

Skiprr wrote:PC §30.06 stipulates exactly what written communication is acceptable as notice. That written communication must be the exact wording shown in 30.06(3)(A) in order for your carrying of a concealed handgun under authority of GC Chapter 411, Subchapter H, to be an offense of trespass.

Has this been tested in court?

The way I read it, I think it could be just as easily interpreted as one example of effective written notice, not necessarily the only example. I understand this is counter to the way most CHL types think about it. I think it is clearly a signage requirement but not so clearly a requirement for written notice in something like an employee handbook. I mean, why would they require specific written verbiage but leave no limitation on oral notice? you have to write some particular legal language, but you can just say "hey you! yeah you! guns a no-no! The bosses do terrible tings iffa they catch yousa with a gun! Yousa be banished! Mesa make you to go away now with yousa guns" and you are legally trespassing? Doesn't make any sense.

But what do I know? I don't even care. I have no intent to push my luck with my employer.

Actually I agree with it. I think it is splitting hairs to say that even though you know full well that the intent of your employer is to disallow you to carry your gun, since it was not written with particular verbiage in the employee manual, you believe you have the right to carry. Clearly the intent of the law is to require the owner of a business or other property to provide you with notice, written or verbal, that you are not permitted there with a gun. Maybe technically there is some way around it if the written notice doesn't conform to 30.06 but it's a real stretch to think that the intent is for any verbal notice regardless of content will suffice, while only very specific written notice will apply. I am not a lawyer and not trying to offer legal advice, only common sense. I wouldn't want to have to make this case in court.

3dfxMM wrote:It still has to be the 30.06 exact wording in the policy for it to be a violation of the law.

If they call the police and have you arrested for trespassing while you are at work, in addition to firing you, my suspicion is that this little issue is going to be regarded as a matter of opinion or extremely narrow interpretation of the law. I think once you wind up leaving the premises in cuffs you can kiss your CHL good-bye, maybe go through a lengthy court fight to get it back if you want to be the test case.

I would add it but I don't feel like registering for another site.

My employee manual does not have that verbiage of a "30.06 sign". It has a list of so-called "common sense" safety restrictions, things that are forbidden at any time and would result in termination, and there are dozens of things listed like making physical threats, harassment, theft of company property, verbal abuse, and "possession of a firearm".

I guess I am more inclined to believe the "spirit of the law", which in this case is clear, my company has made a deliberate effort in writing to communicate their no-guns policy, whether it includes the 30.06 language or not. They have 30.06 signs at the lobby entrances (but not on the employee-only entrances). It is not worth it for me to risk getting fired over this, given my circumstances right now. Worse yet, I don't want to wind up in court testing the validity of the employee manual language as being sufficient notice that it makes it a misdemeanor for me to have come to work armed in order to try and retain my CHL. That's a costly legal battle and IMHO, a very, very weak case.

I'll let you guys know when there is a contract position open so someone else can come in here and defiantly push the rules :)

I work for a company that is based in California and has California-type rules, which includes an immediate-termination threat if you carry any firearm on the premises and a legal 30.06 sign. They are the industry leader in this industry and I have been there for almost 12 years. The fact is that I am compensated at well above the current market value for a new employee in my field, so for me to find a job elsewhere would require a sizable pay cut.

The reality is that this is hopefully my last job in this field. I started my own business last year, and I also work in another field part-time. I think my startup business is likely to grow enough this year or early next year for me to transition to doing that full-time, at which time I can conveniently quit my regular day job without requiring me to find another one in the same field.

I would guess that most large tech companies with multi-geographic campuses even in different countries almost all have universal "no guns" policies, and likely valid 30.06 signage. For those of us in this type of field, I anticipate standing firm on the 30.06 thing will wind up costing 50% of our salary by having to change to a completely different field and get on the bottom of the ladder.