Pawpaw wrote:texanjoker wrote:Hard to not agree to a point. A business owner shouldn't have to play the guessing game if he wants to ban guns from his business. The way the current system is set up, even people in this forum post about signs and whether they are valid. If we are going to have these types of signs, knowing if they are valid or not should be simple.
Hogwash! 30.06 spells out
exactly what is required. There is no guessing game.
Just to open a business, the owner has to do lots of research to make sure he meets all legal requirements for a host of things such as fire codes, handicap access, etc. Why on earth should his desire to prevent law abiding citizens access to his business be any different?
The only guessing game comes about when the owner tries to cheat the system. Either he does not do his "due diligence" or he tries to cheat the clearly worded 30.06 statute because he doesn't want that "bug ugly sign" on the front of his business, so he does something like printing it out on a laser printer. That leaves, typically new, forum members looking for assurance the sign is or is not valid. Remember, CHL holders are a pretty law-abiding bunch.
110%
Mr. Cotton and others fought to hard for the 30.06 for this very reason.
Our church was fined in the City of Irving because we did not have a sign on the inside of the front door that said, "This Door Must Be Unlocked While Occupied." - Really
