Removing the penalty for carrying past a 30 06 sign?

[Charles L. Cotton]

Currently, there are two ways to keep LTCs off private property when they carry self-defense handguns. For concealed-carry, a sign complying with TPC §30.06 can be posted or the property owner can give oral notice. The same is true for TPC §30.07 dealing with open-carry. Those wanting to render 30.06/30.07 signs ineffective are not seeking to render oral notice ineffective, so they acknowledge that a property owner should be able to exclude armed persons from their property. While they agree that property owners should be able to exclude armed people, they argue that they should only be able to do so by confronting the armed individual. That's the part I consider unfair.

Very few businesses post 30.06 signs. The few that do include businesses owned by out-of-state corporations as well as mom & pop shops. If someone is truly fearful of guns, as unfounded as that fear may be, how is it fair to force that property/business owner to either accept the presence of firearms in their store or confront the person of whom they are afraid?
Chas.

Chas, you're succinct and clear as always, but you have repeated several times how the absence of an 06 sign "forces" a business owner to confront a concealed carrier. This concept seems faulty. If the gun is concealed, there's no trigger for a confrontation; the business owner doesn't see it and can't identify the carrier or distinguish the carrier from any other customer.

The concealed gun has no effect on anyone, any more than any other item worn under one's clothing. I'm sure most business owners would wish to exclude, say, KKK members, or people with contagious diseases. What are they supposed to do, administer a polygraph to everybody who comes through the door? The business owner can't identify and confront everybody who's a concealed carrier any more than he can everybody who has been to Kansas. Seems like the fact that the gun is concealed renders this whole idea moot.

I'm not talking about not posting a 30.06 sign. I'm responding to those who want 30.06/30.07 signs to be meaningless. Currently it's a Class C to walk past such a sign. You are correct about §30.06 and concealed-carry. The property owner probably wouldn't see the gun, but if they did, they would then be forced to confront the person. With open-carry, it's a virtual guarantee that the person would be seen and again, the business owner would have to confront that person.

Chas.