Search found 1 match

by TrueFlog
Wed May 08, 2013 9:59 pm
Forum: 2013 Texas Legislative Session
Topic: Committee substitute for HB 972 passes committee
Replies: 36
Views: 11300

Re: Committee substitute for HB 972 passes committee

jmra wrote:
Monkey404error wrote:
chamberc wrote:
TREKFAN wrote:Wow UTSA is gonna have to post like 30 - 30.06 signs and god help them if they are not 100 percent valid. Ill carry right past them in a heart beat .
They only have to post 1. There has never been a test case saying it has to be posted everywhere.
To properly post 30.06 signs, it must be on every entrance available as far as I know (there are a million posts elsewhere, describing exactly this conundrum), although being a school, it might be different set of rules.
Per the code:
"...is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public."
Does not have to be posted at every entrance. Once you see the sign you have been notified.
You also have to ask the question of what constitues a premise. Is the entire campus one premise? Or is each building its own premise? If it's the latter, then each building would need its own sign. Furthermore, if one building is posted but another is not, it would be very difficult for the average individual to determine the intent of the university. Do they intend for that sign to apply only to the building at which it's posted or to all building in the vicinity? It's not immediately clear.

The term "conspicuous" is also worthy of scrutiny. If one sign is posted at a building on the south side of campus, is it "conspicuous" and "clearly visible" to someone entering a building on the north side? Is it reasonable to expect him to know carry is prohibited when the nearest sign is over a mile away? Should he have to walk the entire campus unarmed and inspect every building before rearming going into the one building he cares about?

Return to “Committee substitute for HB 972 passes committee”