User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/23/2006 9:39:18 PM EDT
Just noticed it this last sunday at Traders Village off of hwy290 & Eldrige they have a sign
Posted "No Firearms" but its not the official 30.06 sign, is this valid ? or does it have to be The exact 30.06 sign ? if its valid, won't be going there anymore. By the way its kind of Ironic, you can buy airsoft and pellet guns in there and some of the airguns are just as Powerful as a .22 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2006 10:15:18 PM EDT
[#1]
Are you a CHL holder? If you are and have attended the class then you should know only a 30.06 sign has any meaning to you. And a 51% sign at a bar.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2006 10:16:23 PM EDT
[#2]
It is my understanding that “No Firearms“, means if you have a CHL you can carry. Just don’t toss a shotgun/ rifle over your shoulder and walk in.
The 30.06 and the 51% are the only things that stop me from carrying. And it is concealed so who is going to know? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 4:52:24 AM EDT
[#3]
A sign, that is not an official 30-06 sign, that says no firearms or indicates no firearms allowed in/on the property is still valid. The main difference is that you will be charged with tresspass instead of the Class A(I think it's Class A) misdemeanor. mm |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 6:54:47 AM EDT
[#4]
Not true. Effective notice must be given before you can be charged with tresspass. The 30.06 sign is the only written effective legal notice. The 51% is not a tresspass issue. Effective legal notice includes the full 30.06 sign in contrasting colors with letters at least 1inch high in both english and spanish. If the FULL CORRECT sign is not in place at the entrance then effective notice must be given verbally. I've tried to have people charged with tresspass without first having full WRITTEN effective legal notice (non-firearm related), unless the person refuses to leave with an officer present or has signed a statement they understand they are tresspassing getting them charged won't happen. Those gun buster signs and such don't mean anything to a CHL holder legally, or anyone else for that matter. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 8:24:51 AM EDT
[#5]
Can I get an AMEN, Brother! |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 8:29:38 AM EDT
[#6]
In addition, they are often put up inadvertantly. There are companies that sell packages of standard postings to the HR drones. HR drone sends package to store and manager puts it up without question. A lot of those packages are put up without question. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 10:06:10 AM EDT
[#7]
I've seen a lot of people try to use the same as defense in the Dallas County Courts. I'm pretty sure 100% of them refused to leave when asked. mm |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 1:15:09 PM EDT
[#8]
If you were a CHL holder you would know 51% sign is pretty much meaningless too. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 1:46:53 PM EDT
[#9]
How so? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 2:10:31 PM EDT
[#10]
Sign is meaningless. If McDonalds (which does not sell alcohol) or Harlows (which sells alcohol but not for on-premises consumption) has a 51% sign, carry right on in. No violation. If Silver City (19th overall in Texas for on-premises alcohol sale) does not have sign, carry is still a violation. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 2:45:56 PM EDT
[#11]
Yep... sucks too. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 3:44:42 PM EDT
[#12]
I see what you mean now. I've seen places that I know should have the sign up but don't and vice versa. One of these days there's going to be a lawsuit over this if things don't get straightened out. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 3:52:21 PM EDT
[#13]
You'd think... but ppl have already been convicted and there was no 51% sign... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 4:44:34 PM EDT
[#14]
OT Silver City has that much business??? The place used to be a graveyard a few years ago. mm |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 4:59:26 PM EDT
[#15]
The liquer store I go to took down the "No unlawful weapons" sign and put up the 51% sign. The manager was not in for me to ask about the new sign. I'd hate to have to stop going there, it is right on the way home.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 5:29:46 PM EDT
[#16]
Yep, it was on news last night, they did a story on the manager who stabbed the bartender. #19 for 2005. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 6:04:45 PM EDT
[#17]
They don't sell for on-premise consumption, so the sign means nothing. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 6:51:27 PM EDT
[#18]
I didn't say 51% sign only, I said 51% sign at a bar. The 30.06 and 51% signs are the only signs addressing CHL specifically |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 6:59:54 PM EDT
[#19]
51 signs are effectively meaningless regardless of where they are posted. Their failure to post one is not a defense to prosecution, and their being posted in a non-51% place does not prevent you from carrying. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2006 8:20:15 PM EDT
[#20]
To all that have posted that if I was a CHL holder, I would already know,
1. Yes I am a CHL holder. 2. I posted this to show another establishment trying to get away with this. 3. I am not an attorney and was looking for some clarification. 4. Traders Village is not a bar, so how would the 51% sign have to do with it.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 3:06:47 AM EDT
[#21]
i was in the Taco Cabana in Bastrop, TX, off Highway 71. i noticed a 30.06 sign. on face value it appears to be legal in wording and text (1" letters, English and Spanish, in contrasting colors), but it is not posted at all entrances. it is framed in some thingie next to their soft drink dispensers. i barely saw it .... only because i was getting a soft drink. otherwise i don't think i'd have noticed it. i know i walked by it at least twice before noticing it (entering to order, and going to the bathroom)
probably would not fly in court, but i'm wondering if all Taco Cabana's have this? i never saw one at a Taco Cabana until yesterday. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 3:29:55 AM EDT
[#22]
I understand, it is just another example of improper signage. And I'm still going to point that out to the manager. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 3:45:22 AM EDT
[#23]
The Taco Cabanas in Garland have the same sign. In their case, the signs are posted near the entrance, only the main entrance. They are also in frames and on the wall, both are at about hip level. You can see them from the outside of the doorway if you get creative with twisting you body and get just the right angle to be able to see that wall. mm |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 5:44:30 AM EDT
[#24]
Why would you try to have a CHL holder charged with tesspassing? TXL |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 6:06:46 AM EDT
[#25]
Notice where it says "Non-firearm related"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 7:13:09 AM EDT
[#26]
I think he is talking about trespass in general (notice the nickname), not criminal trespass related to CHLs. He is right about the law though. Only the 30.06 sign gives you effectiive written notice that you are trespassing if you carry a concealed weapon there. The other signs mean nothing as far as written notice; however, if you receive verbal notice that carry is unwelcome and decide to continue to carry or assert your rights, you will get nailed for criminal trespass. Of course, as long as it remains concealed this is all pretty much a moot point. By the way, I noticed Toyota of Plano still has their 30.06 sign up. Cost them a $24k sale the other day when I saw it... I can't believe the manager of that place is that anti-gun. I used to do business with them and sent them an email referencing $6k worth of invoices in two years at their service center and told them that unless the sign came down they would be losing that business. They didn't even think twice about telling me to pound sand (politely). Same response when I told them they lost a sale because of the continuing existence of the sign... I guess I'll have to check out Fowler Toyota since Toyota of Dallas and Toyota of Irving are owned by the same group. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 7:26:07 AM EDT
[#27]
That's insane! I was/am under the impression that the 51% sign is required, much like the 30.06 sign. If they do not post a 51% sign, in what way would you know they are a 51% business? Do you have to guess? Are you required to look at their financial records? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 8:19:08 AM EDT
[#28]
Nope, just one of those things you are supposed to know. Keep it concealed, and it shouldn't be a problem. TXL |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 8:31:11 AM EDT
[#29]
Also apply some common sense. Chili's Bar and Grill is not a 51% location, but Billy Bob's and much of the lower Greenville area in Dallas are 51% locations... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2006 8:45:27 AM EDT
[#30]
I'd welcome anyone with a CHL to carry on my property. Its the drug dealers, and other trouble makers that I use the tresspass statutes against. As tough at it is to get a someone arrested for tresspassing, its still much easier than catching them with the drugs on them, or while they are actually breaking into someones apartment. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2006 12:25:15 AM EDT
[#31]
Here's the deal: 51% establishments are required to post it. For them to not do so is a minor violation on their part. It IS required for them to have the sign up, but it is not required that the sign be up for you to be busted for carrying in a bar. As previously stated, it's not a defense to prosecution that the sign wasn't up -- it's up to the CHL holder to know when he's in a bar and when he's not. To further complicate the issue, some (not most thankfully) restaurants actually have a non-51% area and a 51% area -- the books are separate, they have two liquor licenses, or something (I really don't know, those are just guesses.) IOW, you can carry in the eating area but not in the bar area in these places. It really is a shame that the 51% rule isn't like the 30.06 rule -- we're put in a position where we can unknowingly become criminals. ETA: For the most part you know the difference -- is it a restaurant or a bar? If adults are shooting pool and drinking beer, you can't carry. If families of 6 are eating cheeseburgers and dad's sipping a beer, you're probably safe. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2006 3:59:01 AM EDT
[#32]
I just took the test on Saturday (100% written, 240 on the range
 ) Our instructor said if it looks like a bar, acts like a bar, smells like a bar or their food menu only consist of peanuts and pretzles, then dont carry! Resturants that have bars will either have 51% in the bar area or 30.06 on the front door. If 51% is in the bar of the resturant, stay out of the bar, but the resturant area is fine to carry. Only thing that would stop you is a 30.06 on the front enterance of the resturant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2006 5:38:11 AM EDT
[#33]
Carrying a firearm on a premise licensed to sell alcohol is a violation of Unlawfully Carrying Weapons. It has nothing to do with a CHL and the CHL is not a defense.
There is nothing in Section 46.02 UCW, that mentions any sign required for a violation. It was that way before CHL's in Texas and it is that way now. The CHL obviously has its own set of rules but there are some rules that apply across the board and that is one of them. Do not confuse any of that with what your prosecutor will do. What is prosecuted in one county will be refused in the county next to it. It is at the discretion of the DA in that county. Here is the entire UCW statute: § 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his person a handgun, illegal knife, or club. (b) Except as provided by Subsection (c), an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor. (c) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed on any premises licensed or issued a permit by this state for the sale of alcoholic beverages. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2006 2:18:09 PM EDT
[#34]
Actually it is more than a defense, it is NON-APPLICABLE under PC46.15 (b) (6) which exempts CHLs from UCW. So a CHL carrying where alcohol is sold is not illegal under 46.02. Where it is illegal is under PC46.035 (b) (1), which is where 51% on-premises consumption is codified. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2006 4:17:01 PM EDT
[#35]
Wrong. 46.15 makes all of 46.02 non-applicable. In fact, 46.15 states that; section 46.02 does not apply to a person who is carrying a concealed handgun and a valid license issued under Article 4413(29ee), Revised Statutes, to carry a concealed handgun of the same category as the handgun the person is carrying. 46.02 makes carrying a handgun unlawful, period. The carrying where alcohol is sold is only a penalty enhancement. Since 46.02 does not apply to a person who has a CHL, the enhancement would not apply either. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2006 5:05:49 PM EDT
[#36]
tx, I stand corrected. I had to look at that for several minutes before I figured out that I ran 4413(29bb) [instead of 29ee] which is Private Security Act. I thought you misread that statute but it turns out that I did. Please accept my humblest apologies. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2006 7:06:12 PM EDT
[#37]
It is my experience that txinvestigator can usually be relied upon to clear the air on Texas gun law. It's too bad the laws are so complex and full of caveats. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 12:51:03 AM EDT
[#38]
After 23 years (and counting) of doing the job and filing cases with the DA, I thought I could also. At least this is just a bulletin board debate and not court. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 6:45:04 AM EDT
[#39]
Gentlemen,
Two questions for you who seem to know what's what. Can I carry in a liquor store where no consumption is going on? It seems to be what yall are saying. Both my initial instructor and the renewal instructor said it was not allowed. Am I breaking any law by having my concealed weapon in my vehicle in a company parking lot that has a sign at the entrance stating that no firearms are allowed past the magnetic I.D. badge operated gate? About six months ago a company email was sent that said we were allowed to have weapons for "legal sporting purposes" in vehicles in the parking lots but since that time a corporate review prompted the sending of new emails stating that no weapons of any kinds including firearms, stilletos,clubs etc. were allowed on site past the gates. thanks for any insight leroy |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 7:25:16 AM EDT
[#40]
Yes you can carry in a liquor store unless it is posted 30.06. Most of them will have the sign stating that posession of a concealed firearm by an UNLICENSED individual is illegal, IIRC that sign is required to be posted anywhere that sells alcohol. On the second one, I don't think you are breaking a law, just company policy. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 7:28:04 AM EDT
[#41]
Texas Penal Code §46.035. Unlawful carrying of handgun by license holder. (b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, on or about the license holder's person: (1) on the premises of a business that has a permit or license issued under Chapter 25, 28, 32, 69, or 74, Alcoholic Beverage Code, if the business derives 51 percent or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption, as determined by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission under Section 104.06, Alcoholic Beverage Code;
You could be fired, but if the sign is not 30.06 compliant then you are probably not in violation. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 8:05:58 AM EDT
[#42]
I don't know about that. according to one Sgt. Star Riddle at the DPS training academy, there are Hospitals and other places in the state where you are prohibited from carrying, but have the 51% sign instead of the 30.06 sign. The reason being, is that the 51% sign simply came out before the 30.06 sign. The 51% sign was used as an all-purpose "keep out" sign to CHL holders. and these hospitals and other places, never got around to changing them. She further added that while they are not appropriate, they are still enforceable. The real question is, hospitals and courts notwithstanding, why would you willingly do business with someone who doesn't want you there? |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 8:16:11 AM EDT
[#43]
I am a huge fan of Starr Riddle; however, if she said that she is WAY wrong. read this; Texas Penal Code §46.035. Unlawful carrying of handgun by license holder. (b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, on or about the license holder's person: (4) on the premises of a hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or on the premises of a nursing home licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, unless the license holder has written authorization of the hospital or nursing home administration, as appropriate; (5) in an amusement park; or (6) on the premises of a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship. (c) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, at any meeting of a governmental entity. There is your prohibition. The here is the non-applicability (i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06. There is NOWHERE in the TPC that prohibits you from carrying anyplace that HAS A 51% SIGN posted. |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 8:26:42 AM EDT
[#44]
IIRC, the hospital confusion exists because originally it was illegal to carry at hospitals, nursing homes, amusement parks even without a 30.06 being posted.
Now it's changed and they have to post if they want to keep you out. I'm nervous about carrying in hospitals because I'm afraid I'll encounter a LEO who doesn't know better. The hospital in round rock has a big ol' 30.06 painted on the door. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 8:29:39 AM EDT
[#45]
She did in fact say that, yesterday, at the CHL instructor renewal class. She was addressing the class, which meant they likely wanted this information diseminated to our students.
I'm certainly no lawyer, but I'm a hell of a parrot. While I'm sure the issue could be successfully argued in court ( and paying exhorbidant legal fees), simply being right about a legal technicality is small consolation when compared to being hooked up, taking the ride of shame, and paying a lawyer to vindicate you. Why take a chance like that to support a business that doesn't support you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 10:11:44 AM EDT
[#46]
I am an instructor too. Starr is wrong on that point. Or can you show me in the law where a 51% sign prohibits me from carrying in a hospital? And when my father had a heart atatck and was transported to the hospital, he did not have much of a choice to not support that business. When my Uncle placed my grandmother in a nursing home, I didn't get to not support that business. I am emailing Starr today to get her exact statements, because if you are going to parrot that to your students you are teaching them things that are just not true. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 11:06:52 AM EDT
[#47]
I would like to see her reply to this too, if you can post it. My point is , right or wrong, legal or not, arguing this technicality while the police are arresting you is inappropriate to say the least. and arguing it in court, while appropriate, is a little too late, as you have already been inconvenienced with being arrested,spending time in court, and legal fees. You can be completely exhonerated of wrongdoing, but you will never get your time or money back. And no offense, when my family members are hospitalized, I am not going to stand at the door and argue that the sign is wrong, I'm going to eat crow, put my piece back in the car, and go see my family member. I see your point about not always being able to choose who you can " do business" with ( note my earlier disclaimer" hospitals and courts notwithstanding"), but there is no need to push the legal envelope when it can be avoided altogether. I am a CHL instructor, not a law professor. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 11:21:51 AM EDT
[#48]
How do they know you are carrying anyway?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 11:26:45 AM EDT
[#49]
51% does not prohibit a person from carrying in a hsopital, so I would enter on a 51% sign.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2006 12:44:50 PM EDT
[#50]
Here is the email I sent Sgt Riddle, and the reply I just received;
Her reply:
I edited out some other information we passed that was not relevant to this conversation. |
||
|
|
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.
