Fletcherjl
Member
I go somewhere else. I don't believe in doing business with people that don't love America.
Welcome to the Forum!I go somewhere else. I don't believe in doing business with people that don't love America.
Howdy and welcome.
Ethically, the property owner can follow the law, just like I do. A circle-slash pictogram does not meet the intent of 30.05. So, what would I do…ignore it; I’m concealed and I’m LTC, so it has no standing. Also, I’m not going to store a firearm in my vehicle to do my business. That’s one of, if not the leading contributor to stolen firearms.
Posted with all three signs? Me and my money go elsewhere. Not my job to educate or convince someone how to run their business.
I’ll just say I’ve inadvertently carried in valid 51% places, .06/.07 places, 46.03 prohibited places, AND a federally prohibited places before. I’ve yet to have an LE interaction out of all those opportunities, much less an interaction with a business owner.
30.05(c)
(C) a sign or signs posted on the property or at the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;
Actually, the gun buster sign is a legal form of notice.
A-Men brother!That my friend is the point. Anyone can bash us, but the use of words that exceed the one syllable level tend to throw the trolls back under the bridge. Thanks for your support and kind words. Know that we fight the honorable and good fight for justice and true rights of man. Yhose who oppose this will fail in the long run. Thousands of years of history support the fact that humankind rejects tyranny and oppression with the eventuality of human dignity and rights reigning supreme.
I've been meaning to tell you - I really like that Will Rogers quote!
You know this is still up for debate. Let’s not treat it as fact that your interpretation is fact. I hope you are right though. Our legislators could have said shall but instead said may. On the other hand hopefully business that want to ban CC won’t understand the subtlety.No, no it isn’t. That section is rewritten.
(c) A person may provide notice that firearms are prohibited on the property by posting a sign at each entrance to the property that:
(1) includes language that is identical to or substantially similar to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.05, Penal Code (criminal trespass), a person may not enter this property with a firearm";
(2) includes the language described by Subdivision (1) in both English and Spanish;
(3) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(4) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly
visible to the public.
The “may” is an alternative to purple posts or oral notification. Written notification in Spanish and English is abundantly clear.
Sucks that we have to debate it.You know this is still up for debate. Let’s not treat it as fact that your interpretation is fact. I hope you are right though. Our legislators could have said shall but instead said may. On the other hand hopefully business that want to ban CC won’t understand the subtlety.
"Respect the right of the property owner to forbid firearms if he wants to. I'll go somewhere else."How do you know this if you joined Sept 3? OK I guess you could infer it from some of the responses. On the other hand the poll answer:
I also wanted to reply on this topic. From what I understand, most trespassing issues (other than breaking and entering or burglary) under 30.05 require the offense to occur in the presence of a police officer or a formal written notice of trespass, probably signed by the trespasser, after which police can arrest the person if they come back. If you tell them orally to leave and they don't, police can come and make them leave, but they're typically not just going to arrest them on the spot, especially if they're gone by the time they get there.seems to imply: That a property owner, who otherwise opens his property to the public, has some right to the State's assistance in regulating other people's choices that are unobservable, and have no effect on anyone else. I can put up a "no fat chicks" sign on my store, but I don't expect the cops to come to throw out a "birthing person" of size if she should ignore it and enter my store. That and the fact that owner(s) intent or desires of how people behave are irrelevant to the law. If you don't like someone in your store, tell them to leave. Or put up a sign saying NO TRESPASSING so no one can come in. Don't put a toddler's crayon drawing of a frowny face and a squirt gun and expect us to discern that it means "your entry to this property is forbidden".
"Respect the right of the property owner to forbid firearms if he wants to. I'll go somewhere else."
I also wanted to reply on this topic. From what I understand, most trespassing issues (other than breaking and entering or burglary) under 30.05 require the offense to occur in the presence of a police officer or a formal written notice of trespass, probably signed by the trespasser, after which police can arrest the person if they come back. If you tell them orally to leave and they don't, police can come and make them leave, but they're typically not just going to arrest them on the spot, especially if they're gone by the time they get there.
Would I be correct in assuming a similar process would apply for a person being told orally "no guns allowed" or similar? Basically, if you hang out long enough for the police to get there, you sign this paper acknowledging if you bring your guns back you'll be arrested next time?
I could but I won't. I've just seen this thread. If he means to do "some anti gun hit piece" I'm sure he has already copied the thread and has what he needs.Maybe @benenglish could courtesy flush the noob and his thread so it's not used in some anti gun hit piece?
That my friend is the point. Anyone can bash us, but the use of words that exceed the one syllable level tend to throw the trolls back under the bridge. Thanks for your support and kind words. Know that we fight the honorable and good fight for justice and true rights of man. Yhose who oppose this will fail in the long run. Thousands of years of history support the fact that humankind rejects tyranny and oppression with the eventuality of human dignity and rights reigning supreme.
I couldn't fine {Yhose} in the dictionary.
Would you, please,define that word for us that only,and barely, got out of high school.
I couldn't fine {Yhose} in the dictionary.
Would you, please,define that word for us that only,and barely, got out of high school.
Move over! You're too close!Y was too close to T on his keyboard.
Just like e was too close to d on yours.
Sorry, couldn't resist....