Validiity of Old 30.06

[oohrah]

Ha! My medical clinic has had a 4413 sign up for years. I fully expected to see new signs on Jan 1st, but no change. No way I'm going to say anything.

[scattermaster racing]

another newbie here.
Took my class last weekend and waiting on the state now.
Anyway, I struggle a little bit about all the hoopla over the signs. Which one is valid, legal, and so on.
IF a land owner can simply tell you he doesn't want guns on his property, it seems to follow that he could say so on a sign that just says "no guns".
I mean, even if it's not the 30.06 sign, if you read one of those gunbuster signs, you know that they don't want guns there.
I'm not really sure what I'll do if/when I'm at a door and see one of the old signs. Go in because it's not a legal sign, or go elsewhere because I know in my heart that they don't want the guns there.
Am I the only one here that struggles with that?

[Tracker]

another newbie here.
Took my class last weekend and waiting on the state now.
Anyway, I struggle a little bit about all the hoopla over the signs. Which one is valid, legal, and so on.
IF a land owner can simply tell you he doesn't want guns on his property, it seems to follow that he could say so on a sign that just says "no guns".
I mean, even if it's not the 30.06 sign, if you read one of those gunbuster signs, you know that they don't want guns there.
I'm not really sure what I'll do if/when I'm at a door and see one of the old signs. Go in because it's not a legal sign, or go elsewhere because I know in my heart that they don't want the guns there.
Am I the only one here that struggles with that?

If it's a private business and I see the gun buster sign, I'll respect the owner and not go in. But if I see a GB on a city/county building that I know holds no legal weight I'm ignoring the sign. That said, I wish the legislature would've made city's subject to the same fines for posting GB signs as well as for the 30.06/30.07

[Liberty]

another newbie here.
Took my class last weekend and waiting on the state now.
Anyway, I struggle a little bit about all the hoopla over the signs. Which one is valid, legal, and so on.
IF a land owner can simply tell you he doesn't want guns on his property, it seems to follow that he could say so on a sign that just says "no guns".
I mean, even if it's not the 30.06 sign, if you read one of those gunbuster signs, you know that they don't want guns there.
I'm not really sure what I'll do if/when I'm at a door and see one of the old signs. Go in because it's not a legal sign, or go elsewhere because I know in my heart that they don't want the guns there.
Am I the only one here that struggles with that?

In the case of my original post, The property in question belongs to the people. just because some bureaucrat he doesn't like the idea me carrying a gun inside doesn't mean he has the right to tell me so, nor does it mean he has the right to expect me to respect his ' opinion.

If a private business posts anything close to a 30.06 sign it means they don't respect my business, my safety, nor my life and I will try to avoid doing entering such places. but to me a gunbuster sign means nothing more than they don't want to see my gun. Even though walking into such an establishment may be legal, There is a good chance I would be asked to leave.

[Pawpaw]

another newbie here.
Took my class last weekend and waiting on the state now.
Anyway, I struggle a little bit about all the hoopla over the signs. Which one is valid, legal, and so on.
IF a land owner can simply tell you he doesn't want guns on his property, it seems to follow that he could say so on a sign that just says "no guns".
I mean, even if it's not the 30.06 sign, if you read one of those gunbuster signs, you know that they don't want guns there.
I'm not really sure what I'll do if/when I'm at a door and see one of the old signs. Go in because it's not a legal sign, or go elsewhere because I know in my heart that they don't want the guns there.
Am I the only one here that struggles with that?

Welcome to the forum!

No, you're not the only one. You simply haven't been here long enough to have learned the history of the 30.06 notification requirements. Charles can (and has) explained it far more eloquently and in better detail than I can, but I'll make the attempt...

When CHL first became law in 1995, it was with the assumption that you now hold... any notice was valid, under PC 30.05. Unfortunately, many businesses didn't want to "ugly" up the front of their store by posting notice that was easy for the CHLer to find. Then came the proliferation of gunbuster stickers, sometimes as small as 2". This might have been OK if they had put them at eye level on the entry door, but many would hide them in some out of the way corner where the only way you would see it was to do a detailed search of the entire front of the store before entering.

The next legislative session, in 1997, saw a backlash from the legislators against these unscrupulous businesses. Now, if you want to ban CHL, you had to post the big, ugly 30.06 sign so CHL holders would not be tricked into carrying inside and inadvertently committing a Class A misdemeanor.

In light of this, doesn't 30.06 make sense? Just imagine that, before going into Kroger, you had to search the entire front of the store in an Easter egg hunt for that little gunbuster decal hidden among all the posters they have plastered on the windows.

[C-dub]

And many of the signs were old and had been there for decades. Some of the current owners didn't even realize they were there and when asked about them would take them down since they supported CC. And the sizes also varied and were hard to spot among all the other signs in some windows.

[scattermaster racing]

That makes perfect sense.
thx

[nightmare69]

I still see a view of the old signs posted. I just smile and walk past armed.