John Eagle Honda Signage Report

[LeakyWaders]

I decided not to have service performed on my vehicle at John Eagle Honda after noticing a 30.06 & 30.07 sign at the service center. I sent a letter similar to the one authored by "miljet" in his post titled "One Sign at a Time" dated March 1, 2016. The following day I received a reply from the dealership (see below). Has anyone else heard a similar reasoning for posting both signs at a business?

"Thanks for your email and I totally agree with you as I too have my CHL.

Unfortunately, since the open carry law was passed, our insurance companies have forced us to put both signs up or pay a big premium on our already astronomical insurance bill. They don’t want the extra liability and have forced this upon us.

I continue to argue our point and hope to one day be removing the concealed handgun sign. Please consider this when you see both signs hanging in front of stores. It is not necessarily the opinion of the owner, but are being forced due to small businesses not being able to afford higher insurance rates.

Thanks for your time and stay tuned!"

[ELB]

I am unconvinced. There seem to be plenty of small businesses that get by just fine with their insurance and without those signs. I work for one of them.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I decided not to have service performed on my vehicle at John Eagle Honda after noticing a 30.06 & 30.07 sign at the service center. I sent a letter similar to the one authored by "miljet" in his post titled "One Sign at a Time" dated March 1, 2016. The following day I received a reply from the dealership (see below). Has anyone else heard a similar reasoning for posting both signs at a business?

"Thanks for your email and I totally agree with you as I too have my CHL.

Unfortunately, since the open carry law was passed, our insurance companies have forced us to put both signs up or pay a big premium on our already astronomical insurance bill. They don’t want the extra liability and have forced this upon us.

I continue to argue our point and hope to one day be removing the concealed handgun sign. Please consider this when you see both signs hanging in front of stores. It is not necessarily the opinion of the owner, but are being forced due to small businesses not being able to afford higher insurance rates.

Thanks for your time and stay tuned!"

If you don't mind, please email him/her again and ask if they would agree to talk to me about this and the specific insurance company? If so, please PM a contact name and phone number. I'm working on something now and this would be helpful.

Thanks,
Chas.

[The Wall]

Don't you sign a contract with insurance companies? The answer is yes, just in case you didn't know. Have them show you the contract that states they are required to post these signs. I think they are full of it. So from what they are saying insurance companies could deny your home owners insurance for the same reason. It really doesn't matter why they have posted the signs. They don't need to give you a reason. To make something up like this tells you something about that dealer for sure. Not a surprise coming from a car dealer. They don't exactly have good reputations for telling the truth. When did insurance companies become courts and law enforcement agencies? If this is true they should be looking for another insurance company. Ask them what the liability is for them to protect you while you're on their property when they let someone in that starts shooting people at random. In my opinion having these signs posted is more of a liability. It's an invitation for criminals and wackos. By the insurance company requiring these signs they are saying you are safer in this gun free zone. Wouldn't that make them more liable?

[Soccerdad1995]

There are plenty of other car dealers who do not feel compelled to post by their insurance companies.

I will be in the market for a vehicle soon (daughter is turning 16). I will not be buying from any dealer that posts either sign, simply because there are better options out there.

[treadlightly]

What rich turf for debate.

In 2014, there were 15,648,733 licensed drivers in Texas. There were 3,534 highway fatalities from the death dealing instruments of terror John Eagle sells without FBI background checks.

That same year, there were 825,957 CHL licenses. Tragically, inexcusably, there were 6 cases of murder and three of manslaughter among that group.

I would never trivialize loss of life by any mechanism, and we must work to promote a calm, peace-loving society.

But my calculator tells me a driver's license in the wallet is about 21 times more likely to kill than a handgun license.

Fortunately, even with texting teenagers, most of us can get where we need to in relative safety.

And I'm being unkind to car dealers. Highway fatality statistics are probably inflated with things like meteorite strikes in approved pedestrian crossings, loads of brickbats falling off passing 747's, and all manner of similar incidents not related to automobiles.

[joe817]

We had a topic going on back in February very similar to this one. About the reason for posting a 30.06/30.07 signs because of insurance company requirements. IMO that is a manufactured excuse to put the signs up. For clarification and reasons why that's just an excuse, see:

viewtopic.php?f=129&t=82800&hilit=insurance

To make a long story short......BULL!

[Jago668]

We had a topic going on back in February very similar to this one. About the reason for posting a 30.06/30.07 signs because of insurance company requirements. IMO that is a manufactured excuse to put the signs up. For clarification and reasons why that's just an excuse, see:

viewtopic.php?f=129&t=82800&hilit=insurance

To make a long story short......BULL!

It is not always a manufactured excuse. My mother is president of a credit union. Their insurance rates were going to go up if they didn't put up signs. She knew she had people carrying in the credit union all the time, and she didn't care. Neither did the board. She knows if she just wanted to stop open carry she only needed a 30.07 sign, so it isn't ignorance. It is purely a financial decision. I don't know about every place, but I do know about one. She was going to get her chl until she found out she could carry in her car without it, and that was all she wanted to do. My stepdad carried everywhere he went, and I carry everywhere I go. So she isn't opposed to carrying.

[mojo84]

I've been in the insurance business for 20 years and work with many insurance companies, I still have yet see one require a no gun sign and 80% of my book of business is commercial.

I've never seen it on an application, quote or policy other than when dealing with a business that provides security services.

[J.R.@A&M]

I didn't notice one at Russell & Smith Honda (Main and 610 West) on Saturday. Maybe they have a different insurer.

[ferguson]

If the owner of the car dealership was as interested in 2A rights as you are, he would have sent a similar letter to the insurance company in question and found another insurance provider. There are plenty of commercial insurance providers that have no such requirements. I'm sure the NRA could point the business owner in the right direction if said business owner was so inclined.

My wife's company gave her a similar line - and when she asked if they looked into alternate insurance companies they admitted that they had not. If a company chooses to hang 30.06 and 30.07 signs "for insurance purposes", its either because gun rights just aren't a priority, they don't disagree, or they're just plain lazy.

I call bull

[mojo84]

We had a topic going on back in February very similar to this one. About the reason for posting a 30.06/30.07 signs because of insurance company requirements. IMO that is a manufactured excuse to put the signs up. For clarification and reasons why that's just an excuse, see:

viewtopic.php?f=129&t=82800&hilit=insurance

To make a long story short......BULL!

It is not always a manufactured excuse. My mother is president of a credit union. Their insurance rates were going to go up if they didn't put up signs. She knew she had people carrying in the credit union all the time, and she didn't care. Neither did the board. She knows if she just wanted to stop open carry she only needed a 30.07 sign, so it isn't ignorance. It is purely a financial decision. I don't know about every place, but I do know about one. She was going to get her chl until she found out she could carry in her car without it, and that was all she wanted to do. My stepdad carried everywhere he went, and I carry everywhere I go. So she isn't opposed to carrying.

Your mother's credit union needs a new agent. I can help her out if she's interested.

[ScottDLS]

I'd really love to see the insurance contract language that specifies the type and language of sign that must be posted. I wonder if all the companies sent out policy updates to change the language required and add 30.07 after January 1. Nobody has been able to produce it to date.

[Jusme]

I have no evidence to back it up, but since I would not put it past the membership or the minions who worship at their feet, this sounds like something the MDA, and other groups may be behind. They could have members within the rank and file of insurance carriers who are trying to use their power to raise premiums by threatening insurees with higher rates if these signs aren't posted, or threatening the insurance companies directly, I would sure like to see a list of these companies that are requiring this.
If no such list exists, and these reports are false, then business owners are just passing bad information to their employees to pass on to customers when they ask about the signs.

Doesn't the head Blooming idiot billionaire, own one or more insurance companies?

[rotor]

Perhaps they need to consider extra insurance for selling vehicles with Takata airbags. More likely to kill you than a LTC holder.