Author Topic: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage  (Read 5637 times)

goheeled

  • Guest
HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« on: June 03, 2015, 12:58:19 PM »
After reading through the final version of HB910 (prior to signature) several times, I'm left with a couple of thoughts and questions.

I. I have found nothing in the current PC specifying that a 30.06 compliant sign must be located "at each entrance".  It simply requires it to be "displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public".  Now logic would dictate that in order for the sign to achieve the poster's intended goal, it should be at the entrances... but logic and the law appear to differ a bit on this one.
I've noticed that the posting requirements for a 30.06 sign under HB910 did not specify "at each entrance" but the posting requirements for a 30.07 sign does contain that language.  (See highlighted)
[attachment=2:1ga01e58]Current.JPG[/attachment:1ga01e58] [attachment=1:1ga01e58]new 30-06.JPG[/attachment:1ga01e58] [attachment=2:1ga01e58]Current.JPG[/attachment:1ga01e58]

II. The verbiage required to be displayed on a 30.06 sign is changing.
Currently it reads "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun”.

Per HB910  it will be changed to "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun".

Questions:
1.  Is there a legal requirement stating that both "old" and "new" 30.06 signs have to be posted "at each entrance"?  If so, where is that requirement written?

2.  Will the change in 30.06 sign verbiage make the "old" signs null and void on January 1st, or will they still be enforcable?

3.  Under HB910, 30.06 specifically addresses Concealed Carry and 30.07 specifically addressing Open Carry, will an establishment that desires to use sign(s) to prevent both on their premises have to post both signs.  (I understand that they can still give verbal notice.)

4.  Is there a limit to the number of Class C misdemeanor convictions a license holder can receive for violating either sign before it amounts to a more serious offense?

I appreciate your time and look forward to your guidance.

Rod Townsend
Go Heeled Firearms Training
http://http://goheeled.com/
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

goheeled

  • Guest
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2015, 01:06:44 PM »
I tried embedding screen shots of the current and new 30.06 language and posting requirements, as well as the new 30.07 posting requirements.  Didn't work.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

goheeled

  • Guest
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2015, 01:07:52 PM »
Current 30.06 posting requirements.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

goheeled

  • Guest
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2015, 01:08:51 PM »
New 30.06 posting requirements... unchanged.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

goheeled

  • Guest
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2015, 01:10:29 PM »
New 30.07 posting requirements designating "at each entrance".
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

TexasLawShield

  • Administrator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 991
    • View Profile
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2015, 04:12:07 PM »
goheeled,

Since the difference in language on the 30.06 sign is only 1 word (the addition of “concealed”) you should honor both old and new signs. If only one is posted, old or new, I would not carry past. If arrested, the jury will look at whether or not you had “effective notice” that concealed carry was prohibited under 30.06 at that establishment. The one word difference is probably not enough to constitute ineffective notice. If the AG clarifies the law, or if the courts disagree, we will keep you updated. But right off the bat before we know how they are going to handle it, I would err on the side of caution.

30.06 will be strictly for concealed carry, and 30.07 strictly for open. So if they want to prohibit both, they will have to post both 30.06 and 30.07. If, for example, only 30.07 is posted, you may still carry concealed.

It does not appear that there is any enhancement for the class C 30.06 violations, so having a previous conviction(s) will not make it more serious. If you are personally asked to depart because of your handgun and you refuse, that will make it a class A misdemeanor regardless of whether or not you have violated before.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

goheeled

  • Guest
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #6 on: June 18, 2015, 11:02:35 AM »
Thank you for the response.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

switch

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #7 on: June 21, 2015, 11:15:54 AM »
If they post a 30.06 sign, you can bet they do not want OC either. :)

Sure, you could argue that 30.06 does NOT apply to OC, tuck your shirttail in and walk inside.  If/when they see the gun OC, they will tell you to leave.  Verbal notice is sufficient.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

Catfish

  • Guest
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #8 on: July 17, 2015, 02:09:26 PM »
Speaking of 30.06 signage, the Hillside Village shopping center in Cedar Hill, Tx has posted 30.06 signs on the street entrances to the shopping center.  The center is a large outdoor complex with some 70 free standing tenants.  Is posting a sign on the street entrance "effective notice"?  Normally, 30.06 signs are posted at the entrance to the individual retail stores.  If it is effective notice, then would a CHL holder be in inviolation by simply driving into the parking lot?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

TexasLawShield

  • Administrator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 991
    • View Profile
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2015, 09:18:32 AM »
Catfish,

30.06 signs must be “conspicuously posted.” If there is one posted at a mall entrance, and you enter in through an entrance that does not have this posting it is likely you have not been given “effective notice” of the 30.06 prohibition. If you were arrested, it would be up to your jury to make this “effective notice” determination.

Keep in mind, if there was testimony at trial that you had entered through the mall entrance with the posted 30.06 sign in the past, and you had actual knowledge of the existence of that sign, there is a good chance a jury would think you had effective notice that firearms were prohibited even if you had entered through the entrance with no sign on that particular occasion. Basically, if you know (or should know) that there is a 30.06 posted at a different entrance, you probably have effective notice. If you have never been to a place before and have no reason to know there is a 30.06 at another entrance, you probably do not have effective notice.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

yabu

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #10 on: July 31, 2015, 06:19:31 AM »
I agree that the law and common sense don't always coincide.  I had an occasion to visit a local police sub-station with a friend to make a report of a theft he had suffered on his car.  Fortunately, I was not carrying at this time.  As we entered the office I noticed a 30.06 sign mounted on the back wall of the room.  It occurred to me that in order to read the sign a person would have to be already on the premises and, therefore, in violation of the law before he even saw the sign.  Surely the sign should have been placed at the entrance of the office and not on a back wall inside the room.  Just seemed dumb to me.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »

switch

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
Re: HB910: 30.06 & 30.07 Signage
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2015, 06:56:44 PM »
That sign would be unenforceable.
Starting 9/1, the city will be liable for up to $10,000 a day fine for posting a 30.06 sign on a police sub-station. :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »