User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/16/2021 5:24:35 PM EDT
[#1]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2021 7:42:09 PM EDT
[#2]
I believe the position RenegadeX is taking is that ignoring the 30.06 or 30.07 sign should be simple trespass, not unlawful carry of a weapon or whatever it is today.
(if i'm wrong RenegadeX, please correct me - i'm not trying to put words in your fingers) I'm OK with that. I'm NOT OK with the concept that a property owner should be legally prohibited from creating conditions to entry, regardless of the reason. NO ONE should possess the authority to force conditions upon an owner. Nor do I think that property owner should be liable for those conditions when issues happen because of other parties breaking the law, or those conditions. (i.e., a shooting within a grocery store which is posted 30.06, or similar). |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2021 9:00:13 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I believe the position RenegadeX is taking is that ignoring the 30.06 or 30.07 sign should be simple trespass, not unlawful carry of a weapon or whatever it is today. (if i'm wrong RenegadeX, please correct me - i'm not trying to put words in your fingers) I'm OK with that. I'm NOT OK with the concept that a property owner should be legally prohibited from creating conditions to entry, regardless of the reason. NO ONE should possess the authority to force conditions upon an owner. Nor do I think that property owner should be liable for those conditions when issues happen because of other parties breaking the law, or those conditions. (i.e., a shooting within a grocery store which is posted 30.06, or similar). I'm totally down with this, but I don't think that's his position. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2021 9:27:26 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm totally down with this, but I don't think that's his position. Well I have already said it was twice, here it is a third time: "I would be happy just to scale back our trespassing laws similar to other states where you have to be asked to leave before you are cited." Looks like businesses took another loss with SB20 also. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2021 9:30:22 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well I have already said it was twice, here it is a third time: "I would be happy just to scale back our trespassing laws similar to other states where you have to be asked to leave before you are cited." Looks like businesses took another loss with SB20 also. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm totally down with this, but I don't think that's his position. Well I have already said it was twice, here it is a third time: "I would be happy just to scale back our trespassing laws similar to other states where you have to be asked to leave before you are cited." Looks like businesses took another loss with SB20 also. The state also told city/county governments that if they want to ban guns because they use the court room excuse, the government entity most provide safe storage facilities for handguns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2021 11:19:05 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well I have already said it was twice, here it is a third time: "I would be happy just to scale back our trespassing laws similar to other states where you have to be asked to leave before you are cited." Looks like businesses took another loss with SB20 also. Ah, so you have no problem with businesses using signs to notify people that they're trespassing if they enter private property with things that are prohibited by the property owner (i.e., 30.xx signs)? I thought you were pretty clear about disagreeing with them. Honestly, you're really all over the place. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2021 11:30:20 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ah, so you have no problem with businesses using signs to notify people that they're trespassing if they enter private property with things that are prohibited by the property owner (i.e., 30.xx signs)? Quote HistoryQuoted: Ah, so you have no problem with businesses using signs to notify people that they're trespassing if they enter private property with things that are prohibited by the property owner (i.e., 30.xx signs)? Never said that either. Keep making shit up, it is entertaining to watch. Quoted: I thought you were pretty clear about disagreeing with them. Honestly, you're really all over the place. All over the place? The only place I have been in this thread is advocating for the removal of pre-emptive signs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2021 11:40:52 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Never said that either. Keep making shit up, it is entertaining to watch. All over the place? The only place I have been in this thread is advocating for the removal of pre-emptive signs. I'm done with you. Someone literally just said that they thought your position was that ignoring signs would be trespassing, not UCW, and I said I didn't think that was your position, and then you said it was your position. Make up your damn mind. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2021 11:48:36 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm done with you. Someone literally just said that they thought your position was that ignoring signs would be trespassing, not UCW, and I said I didn't think that was your position, and then you said it was your position. Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm done with you. Someone literally just said that they thought your position was that ignoring signs would be trespassing, not UCW, and I said I didn't think that was your position, and then you said it was your position. Like the 5th time in this thread you keep using words I did not write to define my positions, instead of using my actual words. No wonder you are so confused. This: I believe the position RenegadeX is taking is that ignoring the 30.06 or 30.07 sign should be simple trespass, and this: "I would be happy just to scale back our trespassing laws similar to other states where you have to be asked to leave before you are cited." are the same thing - signs are not pre-emptive. But if caught and do not leave, you get trespass. Yes TinCup erred as it is not UCW, but he also wrote "or whatever" saying he was not sure, but his intent seemed clear to me. Quoted: Make up your damn mind. My mind was made up over 20 years ago, I am against pre-emptive signs for public businesses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2021 4:00:17 PM EDT
[#10]
Well.... I was mistaken in that ignoring 30.06 was (legally) some offense greater than trespass.
Even under 30.06, ignoring it is only trespass. Which is what I thought RenegadeX was arguing for. (based on the assumption ignoring 30.06 was UCW or some other serious offense / punishment) Otherwise what's the point of having the signs? Soo.... yea, I disagree. I am ALL FOR the signs. Every property owner should have some easily available mechanism for creating legally enforceable conditions to entry for anyone who chooses to enter, short of having everyone sit down and sign a document acknowledging those conditions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2021 4:27:44 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Soo.... yea, I disagree. I am ALL FOR the signs. Every property owner should have some easily available mechanism for creating legally enforceable conditions to entry for anyone who chooses to enter, short of having everyone sit down and sign a document acknowledging those conditions. i am fine with signs too. But to give them special pre-emptive power I am not OK with. The current situation with class C if you are caught passing the signs is not ideal, but tolerable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2021 5:05:32 PM EDT
[#12]
My opinion of 30.06 signs or any not gun signs is if you do not want guns on your property you should have to be required to have a place where people can secure their handguns. If not you are forcing handgun owners to try to secure their handguns in their vehicles where many are stolen and used in crimes. This bullshit forced SB 20 to be passed and signed into law today.
Hopefully next session we can get a bill passed that if a business owner does not want guns on his property, it is the business owner that is responsible to provide a place for gun owners to secure their firearms. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2021 5:08:33 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My opinion of 30.06 signs or any not gun signs is if you do not want guns on your property you should have to be required to have a place where people can secure their handguns. If not you are forcing handgun owners to try to secure their handguns in their vehicles where many are stolen and used in crimes. This bullshit forced SB 20 to be passed and signed into law today. Hopefully next session we can get a bill passed that if a business owner does not want guns on his property, it is the business owner that is responsible to provide a place for gun owners to secure their firearms. Nobody is forced to go onto property. Dont like the rules go somewhere else. My primary objection to the pre-emptive signs is you may not see one whether your fault or theres, and it seems very punitive to cite someone who is more than willing to vacate immediately and never come back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2021 5:42:49 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nobody is forced to go onto property. Dont like the rules go somewhere else. My primary objection to the pre-emptive signs is you may not see one whether your fault or theres, and it seems very punitive to cite someone who is more than willing to vacate immediately and never come back. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: My opinion of 30.06 signs or any not gun signs is if you do not want guns on your property you should have to be required to have a place where people can secure their handguns. If not you are forcing handgun owners to try to secure their handguns in their vehicles where many are stolen and used in crimes. This bullshit forced SB 20 to be passed and signed into law today. Hopefully next session we can get a bill passed that if a business owner does not want guns on his property, it is the business owner that is responsible to provide a place for gun owners to secure their firearms. Nobody is forced to go onto property. Dont like the rules go somewhere else. My primary objection to the pre-emptive signs is you may not see one whether your fault or theres, and it seems very punitive to cite someone who is more than willing to vacate immediately and never come back. That is pretty much how the law is currently handled. 30.06/30.07 signs are so big that they are pretty easily seen. I do think removing the ‘no harm, no foul’ amendment from HB 1927 was not a good idea. If you did get a ticket for going passed a 30.06/30.07 sign and it could not be easily seen, like HEB has dark letters on a dark tinted window and on the lowest window, many times blocked from being easily seen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2021 5:44:03 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If you did get a ticket for going passed a 30.06/30.07 sign and it could not be easily seen, like HEB has dark letters on a dark tinted window and on the lowest window, many times blocked from being easily seen. The other issue is not all entrances marked. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2021 5:46:02 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The other issue is not all entrances marked. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: If you did get a ticket for going passed a 30.06/30.07 sign and it could not be easily seen, like HEB has dark letters on a dark tinted window and on the lowest window, many times blocked from being easily seen. The other issue is not all entrances marked. That is true. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
