96

{Since the original publication of this article, Texas has made several changes to the penalties for violating the 30.06 reducing it from a Class A Misdemeanor to a Class C Misdemeanor} For you non-Texans out there, let me open by saying that carrying a gun here in the Lone Star State is fraught with obstacles. First, you have to get your permit, and unlike Arizona to our left or Florida to our right, the process is time consuming and expensive. Second, having a permit doesn’t guarantee that you can actually carry your gun everywhere you’d like. There are the obvious federal properties where you’re statutorily disarmed (schools, post offices, etc.) but in addition to those, your forward progress can also be halted by three signs . . .

CHL-Sign

First is the “No Guns Allowed” sign which doesn’t hold the force of law. The worst that can possibly happen is that someone, somehow, discovers you’re carrying and reports you to the store manager. Said manager can ask you to leave, and if you don’t comply, you’re trespassing.

2w6ckld

The second sign to be on the lookout for is the 51% sign. The 51% sign is mandated by the TABC and requires that any establishment that takes in 51% of their gross receipts in alcohol must bar the lawful carry of concealed firearms. I rate the 51% sign “pants-on-head” stupid given that being in a bar doesn’t make you intoxicated, but being in a bar does effectively disarms you. Nice projection on the part of our government servants. Should you carry in violation of the law where the sign is posted, you’re committing a felony that carries a fine not to exceed $10,000 and a prison term not to exceed 10 years.

However, the most insidious, stupid, and downright shameful sign in the 30.06 sign (at top). Like the 51% sign, the 30.06 carries the force of law in Texas and allows property owners to decide to bar lawful concealed carriers from the premises under threat of a Class A misdemeanor. Class A in Texas carries a fine not to exceed $4000 and/or confinement in prison not to exceed one year. All I can say there is, “At least it isn’t a felony?” with a shrug of my shoulders.

The problem with the 30.06 is that there isn’t any type of requirement to meet before putting up the sign. By virtue of posting the sign, a property owner has marked their entire building as “gun-free,” putting lawful concealed carriers such as myself at risk of imprisonment or fine or worse…robbery, rape, or murder.

I’m not asking for property owners to show compliance with commonly accepted security requirements, but at a minimum, acknowledgement of the risks associated in posting the sign. Many businesses in Texas post them and I don’t feel particularly compelled to reward them with my money. As we’ve seen time and time again, asking patrons not to carry and posting a “No Guns” sign that doesn’t carry the force of law is enough to shut down the vocal minority looking for some cheap wins in the media. Why go further and turn ordinary guys like me into criminals for wanting to simultaneously exercise a right and give you my money?

My bigger beef, though, is with employers who post the sign, barring their lawfully licensed employees from carrying concealed. Let me give you an example:

Employee Tyler drives his truck to work each day and thanks to the protections afforded to him under state law, he is allowed to keep his lawfully possessed firearm in his truck during the day while he is disarmed in the workplace. At the end of the work day and after making the trek across the parking lot, he can regain access to his firearm and continue about his day.

Unfortunately, to cut costs, his employer has rented a building in a less-than-desirable part of town. Local criminals know that Tyler is likely walking to his car carrying several thousand dollars in electronics in the form of his work-issued phone and laptop, the jewelry he wears each day including his gold wedding band and the Tag Heuer watch his wife gave him for their five year anniversary. Tyler is a perfect target for a robbery.

I’m no lawyer (I don’t even play one on TV), but I’d imagine that if Tyler were assaulted walking from his office to his car, he might have a decent case to bring a lawsuit against his employer for failing to protect him during the course of his duties. Crazier things have happened. Luckily for Tyler, he works during the daylight hours and only has to worry about the walk from the building to his car.

Unlike Employee Tyler, Employee Nick is unable to afford a car so he takes public transportation to get to and from work. And because he’s trying to save for a new car, he’s willing to take on a position working the third shift to get that lucrative shift differential pay. This puts Nick is a very dicey position since he must walk five blocks to get to the bus stop and another three to get to the office.

Normally he’d feel better about his odds at night walking around the high crime area near his office with his trusty GLOCK 19 on his hip. Unfortunately, because Nick’s employer posts a 30.06 sign and doesn’t make provisions for safe storage during the day, Nick is forced to make his commute disarmed. He feels that he’s definitely at a higher risk for injury or death given the timing and location of his commute, but if he can just hang for on a few more months, he’ll have enough saved up for a sizable downpayment on a reliable car. At that point, he can upgrade his risk level to that of Tyler’s.

I’m a staunch supporter of personal property rights. No doubt about it, if you want to bar people form carrying firearms on your property, that’s something worth consideration. Unfortunately, the whole issue comes down to individual rights vs. “individual” rights. I post a 30.06 sign on my house and you commit a Class A misdemeanor by coming into my house. While I’d guess that situation has never happened, I think that’s fine and dandy. Person vs. Person.

However, since we treat corporations as people in these fine United States, a company is well within its rights to post a 30.06 sign on the front door providing severe criminal penalties for all those who cross the threshold while exercising their natural, fundamental, Constitutional and God-given rights. If their employees are assaulted or murdered while leaving the office or on their commute, there’s not any legal standing for the employee to seek damages from their employer.

That’s a tough shit kind of situation and one I’d like to see change. I’ve gone far out of my way to meet the legal requirements in this state to exercise my rights (don’t even get me started on those infringements). But with $50 worth of strategically placed vinyl decals, my employer can put my safety outside the workplace in serious jeopardy while not really exposing themselves to any direct legal liability. While I never like to see legislation as a solution to problems, I’d prefer to see a 2A-friendly legislator take up the case to require acknowledgement at a minimum from those posting a 30.06 on a business. In an ideal situation, I’d like to see an insurance requirement for companies that post the 30.06 indexed to the number of active CHLs in the state.

I understand the need to provide legal protection to individuals (real or corporate entities), but I think those thinking of posting the dreaded 30.06 need to take a long hard look at the downstream effects.

Recommended For You

142 Responses to Why Texas’s 30.06 Signs are Deadly

    • I’ve lived all over the US. Indiana was my hands-down favorite place to live.

      Friendliest, decent, best people in the whole damn country live there.

      • Idaho. That is all I can say. Friendly and weapon friendly. That is, unless you have small children you plan on sending to public school. If so, Wait ’till they’ve graduated, then move to America’s redoubt. Or, better yet, move here and home school!

  1. I feel like I am saying who is worse, but really living in California, I would love our laws to be as good as Texas. Doesn’t mean Texas doesn’t want to improve the situation, but seriously, it is like compared to California, DC, Illinois, Texas isn’t so bad.
    Texas CHL isn’t cheep, but compared to the $1,000 plus you might spend when all is said and done in California it isn’t that bad either.
    I commend those fighting to improve Texas gun rights.

    • I commend you all as well. It occurs to me that I have more carry rights in CA with an HR 218 CCW (or a standard CCW) than you do in Texas. We just have crappy 10 rounds mag limits on a host of other challenges.

      Anyways, I’ve supported your Governor and various other TX pro- gun causes over the years, and definitely appreciate your (to include Daniel Silverman on the CA side) efforts to expand carry rights and fight stupid laws.

      • The HR 218 is BS. As a law-abiding citizen I should have the same right to carry a concealed firearm as any LEO, active or retired. This is a violation of our Constitution regarding equal protection. I have a CCW and have had hundreds of hours of training, but I am still treated as a second class subject.

  2. I come down on the side of rights. Individual or “individual”.

    Simply don’t reward them, with employment or solicitations.

    More laws doesn’t solve the problem. Making it a felony/misdemeanor is bad law, however – but a No Guns sign of any kind is an automatic no-go zone for me, whether it has force of law or not. Just as a “No jews” or “New blacks” sign would – places I would not patronize.

    • “No Guns sign” Can’t say I ever seen one but know some retail stores policy is would like for gun owners not bring a weapon into establishment. Well people in Hell want ice water, not likely going to get a nice cool drink.
      I do go into Starbucks and Chilli’s pocket packing a .38 LCR. Wants & wishes does not not cut it with me. If they ever post legally binding sign THEN me & my money will never darken their doors again.

        • What city is that? The IKEA on the Katy Freeway, their only store in Houston, just has the dinky circle and diagonal ghostbusters sign. I usually just ignore it as I walk in.

        • IKEA in Houston *does* have the 30.06 sign now — that is, as of 10/11/2014. They must have put it up recently, because last time that I was in there with my wife (sometime in early 2014?), there was no such 30.06 sign.

  3. @Tyler…..
    and????
    Welcome to the Land of Stinkln’, I mean Lincoln (Illinois). Where after jumping through all the hoops and political obstacles, you can’t carry your gun anywhere it would be relevant like crowds, public transportation…..

    Indiana is looking better and better everyday.

  4. I feel sorry for you guy’s, here in Arizona we don’t have to put up with any of that crap. They say Texas is the wild west ….. well I’m sorry welcome to the real wild west. And it’s still safer than Chicago or New York.

    • I have to agree, I moved here from CA this past August. I tried to put up with the fight in CA, but it just came to the point where I couldn’t take it anymore. I have no regrets with my decision and welcome everyone to make the same choice for your own happiness. I no longer have bullet buttons, 10 round mags, or a limited selection of pistols I can legally purchase. The best part is no NICS check with a valid CCW permit here in AZ. Being able to get a Gen 4 glock 26 last week and walk out the door with it as soon as the 4473 was completed was an absolute surreal feeling after having my rights suppressed for so long. What a lot of people from free states fail to realize is that you do become accustomed to the process of having no rights because that is all you know. I now feel truly free; so much so that I started a transfer for a silencerco saker 7.62 can.

      • If a NICS check is not required, why is the 4473 filled out? I mean, I know the whole reason is actually to create an illegal registration, but what is the supposed excuse? The 4473 is to be submitted for NICS. No NICS, why 4473?

        • So that there is a paper trail for the trace. If the police trace your weapon they go manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer, then owner….if it is the owner they will need to answer questions. Usually federal questions.

    • Ahhh…….Arizona…….the Land of Constitutional Open Carry, where you can get arrested for carrying openly. You can beat the rap, but as an insider tip, make sure you’re a very wealthy, world renown brain surgeon. Otherwise, your mileage might vary.

    • Phoenix is behind only Mexico City in the number of kidnappings. So Arizona is safer than Mexico City. Congratulations?

      • The narrower one confines the research points, the more likely there are errors in the conclusion. The first rule in statistical analysis.
        Any real analysis has to include the rest of the litany of “safety”concerns. Murder, rape, assault, armed robbery, etc.
        In other words, you paint with far too large a brush.

  5. The Placing such signs would decrease immediately if the law also made posters of such sign financially liable all damages done by criminals to the disarmed people on their property.
    Their “right” to control their property is not infringed. But they must then take responsibility for protecting those they have denied the ability to protect themselves.

    • You don’t need a law to do that, you only need a lawsuit by someone that was harmed while disarmed. A successful lawsuit would make some corporate attorneys snap to attention.

    • Perhaps, but that’s just you creating a brand new duty to protect or to compensate, where one such has never existed, out of whole cloth. What other transfers of wealth and/or responsibility would you advocate? Or is this money grab the totality of it?

      • Money grab? You don’t think that after preventing people from being able to defend themselves an employer has a duty to protect those they disarmed?

  6. So have the robbers figured out where to go in Texas? Seems like an invitation. If the convenience store on the east side of the street has a .30-06 sign and the store on the west side of the street does not, it seems like even mentally challenged thugs could figure that one out.

    • The thugs just have to remember not to pocket dial 911 as they make their plans.

      “Hey John, let’s hit the store on the west side of the street. They’ve got a no guns sign.”

  7. I understand Texas is very favorable to personal liability and class action lawyers. Maybe one will find some victims, and family members of victims, and sue a large company- Starbucks, Panera, etc for damages for putting an employee at risk. Then you start in on the politicians, blaming them for the cost. Money talks.

  8. here is a thing.

    http://www.texas3006.com/

    i check once or twice a week.

    the only inconveniences it causes me are at the doctors office, the movie theaters (my wife likes to go sometimes. i could personally just wait for the dvd.) and chuck e cheese (i like to see the kiddos in the family on birthdays.) i dont go to bars, i ignore “gunbuster” signs, and i dont really want to give 30.06 folks any of my money, anyway.

    • Thanks for the link. I see on there that the Whole Foods near me has a sign, so I won’t go there again. I have other stores to choose from. I’m going to let them know why they’ve lost my business.

  9. he might have a decent case to bring a lawsuit against his employer for failing to protect him during the course of his duties

    Nope. If our hypothetical employee was actually performing his work duties when injured, all he can receive is workers compensation.

    In an ideal situation, I’d like to see an insurance requirement for companies that post the 30.06 indexed to the number of active CHLs in the state.

    First of all, companies already are required to provide insurance. It’s called workers compensation. Second, if the state requires companies to provide some kind of special “crime victims” insurance, you can absolutely count on the state imposing a similar insurance on you — and unlike the business, you won’t be able to afford it. Kiss your gun rights goodbye.

    • I’m not sure I agree, Ralph. If the employer showed negligence in addressing a danger to employees, then there is still a basis to sue. For instance, if employees (or passers by) regularly get robbed in the parking lot and there is no lighting provided or a fence or anything to mitigate a known danger, then the employee is not limited to workman’s comp.

      At least that’s how I remember the law. I didn’t look anything up, so I stand by to be corrected.

      • Workers comp still applies in most cases of employer negligence. But, naturally, it only affects workers of the employer, not visitors and patrons. So assuming that an employee (pursuing his employers business) and a shopper were both injured in the same place, the employee would get workers comp via the expedited WC process, while the shopper would have to sue. The shopper has a bigger upside, but the employee gets paid much, much faster.

        But the main thing is that an employer declaring a workplace to be a “gun free zone” is not negligent. Stupid, yes, but not negligent. So if there are a lot of parking lot incidents sufficient to trigger a higher degree of care, the ban on guns won’t figure into the liability equation at all. Inadequate lighting? Sure. Failure to patrol? Sure. Gun ban? No.

  10. While Texas is nice (good friend went to UT and I’m gonna be in SA in a week) I do enjoy the carry laws in AZ, less complicated.

    • If you head down to the river walk in S.A., there are many hybrid restaurants/bars. Some have extensive food menus and outdoor seating more popular than the indoor seating.

      You won’t notice, however, until you take a restroom break and walk inside, that *some* of those establishments are actually more bar than restaurant and have a 51% sign posted inside. Let’s just say I knew of someone once who may have technically been in violation of that law, completely unknowingly. Be careful.

  11. 2 things about the 30.06 piss me off. First, it denies armed entrance into an establishment, and second, its required to be in Spanish as well.

    • Legal permanent residents with no criminal record don’t have a right to keep and bear arms to defend their families from (ignorant) people who want to harm them or take advantage of them because they dont speak english/ don’t look the same as others? Or are you arguing they don’t also have the right to be properly notified of places that prohibit it so that they can avoid unnecessary imprisonment? How wonderfully accommodating and thoughtful of you!

        • Having a 30.06 sign isn’t an accommodation. If it was in English only, a non-English Spanish-only reader could be able to escape “justice” by claiming (correctly) that he didn’t know that the premises were “gun free.”

          Language deficiency is the reason for pictograph signs. 30.06 has no pictograph; hence, the Spanish paragraph.

        • Well for starters I am married to someone who speaks Spanish as a first langue and who came here the legal way. She’s a damn good shot too. I agree with the high level sentiment (and note that my wife is equally frustrated by people who refuse to learn the primary language where they have chosen to live), but when you just blanket state that you are “tired of being accommodating of everyone” you just sound like an ignorant asshole, and we (people of the gun) are better than that.

        • So, an Italian immigrant is less important than a Spanish one? What about Vietnamese? Cambodian, French, Russian? WTF is Spanish so important/all encompassing for? Every language on the planet, or English only. Let’s not be morons.

        • @LarryinTX, no ethnic group should be more important than any other. But it’s a numbers game. If there were 35 million Cambodians living in the US, then you can bet that Cambodian would appear on a lot of signs and documents.

  12. The only thing more infuriating than the 30.06 signs and the 51% signs are the ones where the owner has just printed one out in black and white ink (or photocopied) on a standard piece of paper. Not at all up to the legal standard by Texas Penal Code, then you are stuck with the dilemma of “do I thumb my nose at this ignorant noob who doesnt know the law” or “do I play it safe since 9 out of 10 police officers who would respond to the call wouldnt know or care before arresting you or possibly worse.” I was in a very nice bar for a wedding reception in Houston that really should have known better and certainly had the means to do it right, and they had one that was obviously a printout of a jpeg they found somewhere and blew up to fit on a 8×11 sheet of printer paper and then ran it through a photo copier (or just had a really ghetto printer). To top it off it was buried in the back corner of the bar with a bottle or two half blocking it. Legit? No, but is it worth potentially getting shot by a responding officer or just having my life ruined by being arrested and taken downtown if someone finds out?… Hell no!

    • Hasn’t really come up for me yet, but if I see such a sign that doesn’t hold the weight of law, I think I’d be tempted to point it out to the manager.

      There’s a new BBQ place that opened in a house in Buda a few weeks place, the entrance goes right into the bar area, where they take your order. Their dining area is in the rooms beyond (or outside). So legally, I can’t order there if I’m carrying. I’m thinking I just won’t go back if they don’t make some kind of change.

      • This is a slippery slope.

        You can tell the manager the sign doesn’t meet legal requirements and then one of 3 things happens. 1) He gives you a nod/wink and says thanks for the info. 2) He says “Oh really? Let me fix that so it is legal.” 3) He says; “Oh really? Are you carrying? If so, you need to leave because I don’t want guns here.” And he fixes the sign.

        So, option 2 and 3 have a deleterious effect.

        I do understand carrying past a legally worded but not legally correct sized sign and the inherent risk. Yes, I did it once given the low risk environment I was in.

        IMO, not saying anything is the way to go. It prevents a invalid sign from becoming a valid sign.

  13. I don’t read so good, but looks to me like you are OK unless you are concealing a thirty-ought-six. They just don’t fit under my shirt, so no problem. 😉

    Seriously and just FYI, in VA, you can CCW in any bar if you are not drinking alcohol. That is at least more reasonable than that 51% thing. I don’t like either law, but I will also say that for practical purposes, lethal weapons and bars don’t mix.

    It’s amazing to me that Texas has a rep as being a gun-friendly state, but it seems not so much.

    • Same alcohol consumption rule applies here, UPSTATE New York.

      I agree with you on the misleading pop culture rep Texas has in regards to gun rights. The first time I traveled there on business I was a bit shocked. I knew OC was a no go, but the sheer amount of 51% and 30.06 signs I saw amazed me.

      Any of you Texans care to shed light on the 30.05 signs? The convention center I was at for a tradeshow had essentially a plaque on one of the entrances with that language. I did my best to google whether that was still valid but couldn’t find a reputable source other than forum conjecture.

      BTW this is another great argument for national reciprocity. I can cross state lines in my truck, know my license is still valid, and not have to worry about stringently assessing local laws for stipulations completely nonexistent in my state of residence.

      • I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but it I my understanding that 30.05 has to do with “Vital Infrastructure” locations like railroads, power stations, dams, and such. I can’t imagine why a convention center would count but… hell’s bells, there ain’t no way to know what the gumment thinks.

  14. An individual should not have the power to make me a felon when I’m going about a otherwise legal activity. I do believe property owners can enforce a no-gun policy, but breaking that policy is a felony?? That is absolutely ludicrous.

    • Yes. Although the threat of becoming a felon is effective at scaring me into line, I think felony charges should be reserved for criminals with malicious intent. These deals should be misdemeanor, no jail, $500 or so.

    • Agreed.

      The 30.06 signs are collusion between business and government, a form of crony capitalism.

      It’s the flip side of government and special interest groups forcing bakers and photographers to do weddings they don’t approve of. If we used the same logic from those cases, every business would be required to allow gun owners on premises.

      Just as businesses should be free to decide how to run their establishment, businesses should also take responsibility for dealing with customers whom they don’t wish to serve.

      Why should businesses have a special accommodation in the law for dealing with someone carrying a firearm. In other words, businesses should use existing trespass law. If an establishment asks them to leave and they don’t, then call the police.

      Why not have a Shoe Law that makes it a crime to go barefoot in a business?

      These malum prohibitum laws are destroying our liberty.

    • Aside from the ridiculous CC rules, and no OC, it actually is. No magazine restrictions, no AWB, NFA is legal, suppressors for game animal hunting, etc………………….

      • Ridiculous CC and OC laws far outweigh any other positive aspects of gun laws in Texas.

        The laws are akin to being able to own any type of car you want, except that you can’t drive your car in public unless it’s covered with a tarp (misdemeanor).

        And by the way, you can’t drive it to certain stores (misdemeanor) or restaurants (felony).

  15. So if a business is legally responsible to provide adequate fire suppression gear in a business to avoid lawsuits, fines, and criminal charges, why aren’t businesses required to provide armed security in places where customers are required to be disarmed? It has been one of my standard questions for anti-2nd Amendment folks for a number of years.

    • If police have no duty to protect you (which is the law). then why should private businesses have an obligation to protect you?

      • But apparently businesses DO have that obligation — not to protect any single individual, but to take certain steps that protect *all* people who may be on the premises at any given time. Otherwise why does the law require fire alarms, sprinkler systems, and highly visible emergency exits? Businesses have an obligation

        The same requirement could be extended to guns: it’s simply illegal to prevent people (as a whole) from defending themselves, unless you take steps to mitigate the risk.

  16. Whilst the 30.06 isn’t ideal, look at it like this:

    Those who want to ban guns have to follow a VERY specific law on how to do so, and most post a sign with EXACT wording in both English AND Spanish, and be at least 1″ in height, and with contrasting colors. ONLY THEN can they bar you from going in… as opposed to many states where a simple “No guns” or gun with a slash through it are legal and thus much easier to ban concealed carry.

    Most places only post the English portion, and only sometimes with the correct law quoted (30.06 as opposed the older law).

  17. I don’t see the problem. I support a business’s right to determine its business interests as it sees fit. I may not patronize that store, but I support their right to drive my business away.

    • But do you support making it a criminal offense?

      A privately owned establishment can already throw anyone out for any reason, or post signs saying you’re not welcome if armed. Same as I could with my home. If the person ignores it, and refuses to leave that is trespassing.

      But as others have noted, why should the specific reason “legally carrying a concealed weapon” make it an instant crime? What if people entering a store without a shirt or shoes that has one of those signs posted was instantly guilty of a felony for it?

        • You miss the point. You walk in concealed carrying *poof* you are officially guilty of a crime.

          You walk in with no shoes, they must ask you to leave, and you refuse before you are guilty of a crime.

          HUGE difference.

          The point here is that they are treating firearms specially here. They are making it an outright crime to enter in the first place. The same cannot be said for normal trespassing (remember we are talking about a business, not a personal dwelling).

        • No, you are not “poof” guilty. You still need a jury and a verdict to be guilty. And if the sign isn’t clearly posted, etc., then you may not be guilty.

          I just don’t see a problem. Once the concept that the state can declare who can carry a gun is granted, then this is just a small responsibility for carrying a gun.

          I don’t agree that the state should be able to decide who can carry a gun, but that’s a different debate.

        • Misnomer is spot on.

          Firearms are being put into a special category for business establishments.

          It makes as much sense as the gun-free school laws.

          Walking on the sidewalk in front of the school, no problem. Accidentally step on the school’s lawn — bam! — just committed a felony.

          Malum prohibitum laws need to be repealed.

        • “No, you are not “poof” guilty. You still need a jury and a verdict to be guilty. And if the sign isn’t clearly posted, etc., then you may not be guilty.”

          Being guilty, and found guilty in a court are 2 different things. I guess this is one of those agree to disagree situations. I just think it is wrong to treat someone differently because they entered your establishment legally carrying a gun instead of not wearing shoes. It should be like everything else a matter of “I don’t want you here with that, so leave” rather than “congratulations, you’re now under arrest and charged with a misdemeanor (or felony!) for walking in here with that.

          Those anti-gun signs should have the same force of law as a “No shirt, no shoes, no service” sign.

  18. They put one of these on the front door of the new Endoscopy clinic up the road in Flower Mound TX.
    At first I thought this was idiotic but then I remembered being stripped down to a drafty robe when I had my procedure which would mean that I would have to be separated from the weapon while under the anesthesia.
    That would be when the weapon would be most likely to grow legs and disappear.

    • I corresponded with the President of the local blood bank about their “no guns” sign and I understand their concerns about blood donors or hospital patients carrying. He didn’t explain why visitors who aren’t patients are subjected to the same restrictions.

  19. I found it hilarious that a hospital had the 30.06 sign posted on it’s front doors….in Northern VA. I shook my head and walked on.

  20. One thing I would like to know. If a manager or business owner posts a 30.06 sign at his business, is he exempted or is he in violation as much as anyone else who carries onto the premises? Is such a business owner/operator also in violation of the law, as they attempt to disarm everyone else?

  21. Illinois seems to have followed Texas’ lead with regard to 51% taverns and property owners being able to prohibit guns with the force of law. Thankfully it’s only a Class B Misdemeanor here, but there is an officially defined 4″ x 6″ sign that must be posted.

    I agree that property owners should be able to regulate the behavior of those who enter. But they shouldn’t have the ability to turn legal behavior into a criminal offense, just by posting a sign.

  22. I am a firm believer in personal property rights. If a property owner wants to put up the 30.06 sign I can discuss it with him, or go elsewhere, including elsewhere to work. Yes, I live in TX and yes, I have a concealed carry permit and yes I often carry, so this issue does affect me.

    His property, his right to put it up. And I’ll defend his right to do so. If the law changes, great, but until then I think it’s a good balance.

    • Private residential property I agree.

      Businesses open to the public, no way.

      The right of every citizen to defend themselves with an efficient tool from the threat of grave bodily harm, crippling injury or death trumps the business owner open to the public right to ban it.

    • Businesses open to the public shouldn’t get special laws for enforcing what is basically a “company policy.”

      They can ask the person to leave.

      If they don’t, call the police and arrest them for trespassing.

      There doesn’t need to be a special law for trespassing with a firearm vs. trespassing with a samurai sword.

    • While I tend to agree as to the current situation, I would support a law which would remove that possibility, just as a business owner can no longer refuse service to racial minorities. After which the business owner can obey the law or sell the business to someone who will. Just like the 1960s. There is no rational reason why a business owner should be able to dictate what I carry with me, so long as I offer him and his customers no offense. Robbing the place is a crime, carrying a gun is not. And armed robbers do not obey those signs.

  23. @Tyler…..
    “and????
    Welcome to the Land of Stinkln’, I mean Lincoln (Illinois). Where after jumping through all the hoops and political obstacles, you can’t carry your gun anywhere it would be relevant like crowds, public transportation…..

    Indiana is looking better and better everyday.”

    Guessing none of this discussion is relevant to Chicago though. Am I right about that, or not? Doesn’t Chicago have very stringent firearm laws on the books?

    • Illinois, in general, is bad. Chicago is worse about where you can/cannot carry. Rahm and mini-me McCarthy are doing their damn-est to keep lawful gun owners out of the city.

      Where as the morons that fuel heyhjackass.com ‘s stats seem to not be affected by such laws and restrictions.

  24. The 51% law is absurd. People used to SHOOT in bars. They would use 8mm flobert gallery guns. The loser would have to buy a round of drinks for everyone.

    • Why is 51% the cutoff?

      Was there some divination done? A consultation with the Oracle? Reading of tea leaves?

      Why not 50.01% or 75% instead?

      It’s just some arbitrary feel good number. Like a 10-day waiting period. Or a 10-round magazine limit.

      Wait! I see a pattern emerging around the number 10…maybe that’s significant!

      • Would you rather not be able to carry in ANY restaurant that serves open containers of alcohol? I’m not an expert but it has to be tied to some definition by the TABC that determines if an establishment is officially a bar as opposed to a restaurant that serves alcohol or whatever. Its just a line in the sand so that the law prohibiting carry in bars can be enforced, and yes I agree that is stupid. Every argument I have ever heard against carry in bars involves a lot of projection on others basically assuming that people are unable to do anything in moderation.

        I had a good talk with a friend once who wanted to get a gun but then very defiantly stated, I would just be worried I would accidentally shoot myself or someone else when I get drunk… guy couldn’t be near a bottle without going too far, he was one of those people for whom “1 or 2 beers” wasn’t in their vocabulary if he was going to drink he was going to go all the way. In case you are wondering, those kinds of people are the reason we have 51% signs.

        • It’s one thing to be grateful for what one has, but I’m not sensing a whole lot of indignation at these infringing laws.

          I’m puzzled by the defeatist tone coming out of Texas, the gist of which are:

          ——

          Well, it’s not as bad as the State of ___________ .

          They need to draw the line somewhere.

          It’s not so bad since the law has stringent requirements on the sign’s font size, color and placement.

          I’ve never encountered one of those signs, so it’s not really a problem for me.

          Crappy CC and OC laws are the price we pay for no restrictions on what we can buy.

          I don’t go to bars, and the only place it’s really a hassle is at the doctor’s office….oh, and the movie theater…and Chuck E Cheese…and…

          At first I thought the sign at the clinic was idiotic, but then I realized without the law I wouldn’t have enough common sense to leave my gun in the car since I’d be stripping down into a drafty robe.

          The signs are rare, so it’s not a big deal.

          Intangibles like public attitudes can mitigate prosecutions and jury trial convictions.

        • Wait now! You’re saying those laws are based on the assumption that 49% of the people in an establishment being both falling down drunk and armed to he teeth is safe, but move to 51% and suddenly there is a problem? Does anyone actually believe that?

  25. If you think Texas and Illinois are bad you don’t live in the world of Cook County Illinois. And even worse the city of Chicago. Cook County says no AR even in your own home. The city says only 10 rounds no laser sights and no carry in forest preserve or public transportation. Actually the forest preserve thing applies to all of Crook county

  26. I agree, and I don’t like the signs, but that is the right of that business. I’d rather see a clause in law that states that an employer who limits the 2nd amendment rights of his employees which can be shown to have precipitated a robbery, rape, or murder of them shall be liable for depriving them of their God-given right to self-defense.

    Also, you said “but being in a bar does effectively disarms you.” Please have someone check your grammar. I volunteer to help you if you need it.

    • The problem with the 30.06 law is that it’s creating a special category of law for enforcing a company’s business policy.

  27. I’m glad to be in Florida. But, based on culture, I would have always expected TEXAS to be the most “gun-rights-friendly” state in the country. It’s not. I find it a bit ironic, given the image of Texas culture.

      • Democrats who passed large numbers of laws intended to be enforced on blacks only (eh… maybe Indians, too). Everybody knew that. Then when the enforcement began to change, they forgot to repeal those ridiculous laws.

  28. I’d love to see two universal laws go into effect (fat chance)
    1. Any place showing a sign outlawing guns in their establishment must provide lockable safekeeping for said gun, while the patron is on the premises, and the proprietor shall be held responsible for theft.
    2. Post Offices that have a separate area for PO Boxes will allow CCW permit holder to carry their weapon in the box area only.
    Almost every day, when I go to the PO, I have to leave my weapon in the car while I walk 30 feet to my box. It’s not a big deal, I just don’t see the reason for it, and there are cars usually parking next to me, and can see that I am removing my piece from my person.

    • im not completely certain, but i think having a gun in your car in a parking lot on post office property is still unlawful. dont take my word for it, though.

      EDIT: nope, nevermind. im wrong. Bonidy v USPS

      • actually, i might be wrong again. this decision might only apply to colorado. im going to stop muddying the waters now.

        • The decision covers very limited situations (not post office parking lots generally), is only precedential in the 10th Circuit, and is currently on appeal. Definitely shouldn’t be relied on for the general proposition that it’s legal to carry in P.O. parking lots.

    • This concept is the main reason I want OC in TX. If someone happens to see your piece momentarily exposed due to a gust of wind, or your compliance with a law requiring you to remove it, or whatever, you are in violation of the law. That is stupid. Legal OC without CC is likewise stupid, it gets cold so you put on a jacket and go to jail. What? Just stupid. Whichever you wish to practice (OC or CC) you need both to be legal or you are looking for trouble from momentary deviations.

  29. I have no problem holding property owners responsible for taking over the safety of people on their property. Sign me up for that jury.

  30. I can’t believe after all this time that there hasn’t been a test case. If I am disarmed because you want to feel good that would seem to mean you are taking on the responsibility of my safety as you have taken the ability from me to patronize your business. If I get mugged or worse because you had a sign up that would make me a criminal then how is it not criminal if I am hurt or worse while on your property. You chose to take my safety away, that should therefore mean you have assumed it and the responsibility to go with it. Sooner or later someone is going to be disarmed and get hurt at a mall or public venue. I’ll be curious to see the legal fallout from that when it comes.

    FYI a lot of places in Texas fail to place the sign at all entrances. It is there responsibility to make known at every entrance, and if it’s not there it can’t be held against you. When I find ’em I use ’em. Not my fault you’re too lazy/stupid/uncaring to not be as diligent.

  31. “Many businesses in Texas post them [30.06 signs].” Wrong. Such signs are rare. Where you’re apt to see them, if at all, is at office buildings or industrial facilities; that is, B2B establishments where you’re likely already forbidden by employer policy and communicated to you via employee handbook. The sign is just reinforcement.

    As for a general, open to the public place, like a retail shoppe, these signs are not at all common. You can go years without ever seeing one, let alone a valid one.

    I say valid, because prior to pre-emption, local governments liked to put them up and some are still up. Just last year I contacted the county to have the outdated 30.06 sign removed from the local library. They obliged without protest or delay.

    To your main point, which I describe as “I support private property rights, but……”, these businesses do not owe you a duty to protect you from murderers. As we hear in here often, anything can happen any time, any place, but really such violent encounters are exceedingly rare. They would not by any reasonable standard be considered part of usual and customary care that a business owes to the public at large. Thoroughly cooking the chicken, employees washing their hands after using the restroom, cleaning up a spill of iced tea, these are normal and expected. Transforming the staff into your, and everyone else’s, personal security detail upon penalty of civil liability, is absurd in the extreme.

    They’re perfectly within their rights to bar firearms as they perceive necessary for their own safety and financial liability. It isn’t your right to impose some new and novel standard upon them to protect you or compensate you when there was no duty to begin with.

    If you believe being disarmed is inherently dangerous, as I do, then it is incumbent upon you not to subject yourself to that foreseeable danger, or at least to accept the risk if you do. POTG need to quit blaming others for their own problems and their own choices, and definitely need to quit imposing their lifestyle on others.

    This is the second time recently that this whiny “I want my guns, or else you write me a check!” tantrum has been thrown in TTAG. It’s already become extremely tiresome.

    • Consistency check.

      So you don’t support laws or judicial rulings that require bakers, photographers, etc. to violate their deeply held religious and moral views?

      • That’s correct. If your religious beliefs hold that homosexuality is a sin, for example, then that’s between you and God. The government should have no say in forcing you to supply cakes to such couples’ so-called weddings.

  32. Whenever I see these stories I’m reminded that these businesses have no idea of how many people are turning away from supporting them because of the signs. Maybe make up some business cards you carry with you to provide to the owners or managers explaining that is the only reason you aren’t supporting their business.
    you live in a community. tell them about your actions or nothing will change.

  33. Texas is still 20 years behind much of the rest of the South when it comes to carry laws. Remember– they used to not have it at all– back in the early 90s.

    Here in Georgia we are whittling away at the last remaining bits of BS. Got the knife laws fixed pretty much, too.

    (As I flick my Microtech in and out.)

  34. Texas gun law aren’t the worst, but they aren’t the greatest either. Middle of the pack. Hoping you guys down there can continue to get positive changes.

    • I like to think we’re somewhere around the 75th percentile or so, but definitely with lots of room for improvement.

      There are intangibles, though, that people tend to gloss over. Things like public attitudes, which aren’t written in any law, neverthless still impact such things as jury verdicts and prosecutorial discretion. In some nominally pro-gun states, maybe the on-the-street applications of freedom aren’t quite as clear cut as the law might imply. For example, OC may be legal someplace, but are onlookers apt to call 911? Will responding officers cite you for disorderly?

      There’s a lot of wiggle room sometimes, so the true assessment of a state can be a little trickier than just a straight comparison of statutes.

  35. Yep Illinois sucks. A lot of Cook county folks are transferring guns to Will. county from Indiana. They don’t care what Cook does. And all the Indiana gun shops will sell any rifles to Cook county folks. Well maybe not Cabelas but others will. Many Cook suburbs don’t enforce this gobbledygoop s##t law…and yeah Indiana looks great from a mile away.

  36. “There are the obvious federal properties where you’re statutorily disarmed (schools…”

    If you’re referring to the federal ban on carrying within 1000 feet of a K-12 school under the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990, it does provide an exception for person licensed to carry a firearm by the state containing the school.

    • Not a lawyer, but I understand the exception only applies if state law permits gun carry on school property.

      Many states have their own laws that prohibit guns on school property.

      In light of that, federal law would also apply to those states.

  37. i live in indiana so i dont face many problems on where i can carry or not, but then i’m a fat man with an uncle mikes fanny pack holster i might get snickered at and pointed at but it wont be because anyone can see me packing

  38. The article talks about the company banning guns and not providing a storage means however if they provide a secure storage, this would mean very little if the public transportation company also post the 30.06 signs on their busses

  39. If I worked where Employee Tyler or Employee Nick worked, I’d carry. Concealed means concealed, and I value my life more than a paycheck.

  40. Come spend a day in TN/MS. I’m grateful for our liberty. OC (no permit), CC (with permit), AR (heck, I can even keep my AR loaded in the trunk! Just can’t have one in the chamber.), Class 3 and whatever else you can think of. We don’t have a 51% law, just a blanket law that states if you are intoxicated to any degree, you are in violation of your CCW.

    • In TN car carry is legal for all non-prohibited persons, but handgun OC and CC require a permit. You can carry in establishments that serve alcohol, but you cannot consume any alcohol while carrying.

  41. Banks in AL often post a ‘no guns’ sign. In researching why, I came to conclude because their liability insurance prefers the odds of a bad guy killing bank employees to that of possibly the employee defending themselves and things not working out perfectly. For the business, it’s a liability incentive to go against your constitutional rights, a disregard for individual rights and life. I refuse to do business with such bank and if I feel compelled to do business with any bogus ‘gun free’ establishment, I carry there anyway. Bad laws may make good people criminals, but not into bad people.

    Just last week, TX had a guy save the employees of a bogus ‘gun free’ bar and eliminated 2 evil perps. The good guy is a felon, yet still a good guy.

  42. Simple, just like you have the choice to not give businesses your money, you can choose not to give that employer your labor. You also have the choice to find a job in a state with less restrictive CC laws.

    Those employers and businesses for whatever reason have chosen to feel “safe” by providing their employees with a gun free work zone. You don’t have to work there if you don’t feel safe….you’re always free to go elsewhere.

    • That is a false choice. States regulate all kinds of stuff businesses do and this is no different.

      My last employer prohibited carrying a gun in my car in the parking lot (which was NOT theirs, but a multi-tenant lot for a big office building). They also prohibited carry on the property and in the parking lots of any of the company’s vendors or customers. It was a violation of my company’s policy to carry in my car on Saturday and go through my bank’s drive-through ATM because my bank was a customer.

      Those latter provisions are still enforceable even after the latest changes to Texas law.

  43. The only way to deal with a 30.06 posted workplace when all you’ve got is public transportation is a Ruger LCP-sized pistol. Drop it in your pocket and screw ’em. Nobody will ever see it.

    Not sayin’ that’s what you SHOULD do, you understand….. [wink-wink]

  44. It’s an explicitly protected right. If a private business can be stolen by some people and told that it is public and forced to admit and make accommodation for people they don’t want to associate with and/or cater to then they should darned well be forced to admit and accommodate explicitly protected people.

    That is, of course, a by far worse second place option to real freedom.

  45. Do you secure your weapon in your vehicle while you’re at work ? I have ‘micro safes’ in my cars for my handgun(s) when I go somewhere I can’t take a firearm – bars, church, work, etc. Putting the gun under my seat or glove box isn’t good enough. Neither is a locking console or in the trunk. I’d hate for my weapon to be stolen and used against innocent people.

  46. I am a fifth generation Texan and I hate this SOB. It is the most BACKWARD state in the USA, and VERY expensive to live in even though we do NOT have a state income tax, though I can promise you we will soon.

    All of my life Texas has always been dead last in everything good and first in everything BAD. That idiot that we have for Governor a D and F student in College who has a “degree” in “Animal Science” he runs all over the place bragging about the GROWTH that has absolutely RUINED the state and then he brags about all of these Wal-Mart and Home Depot Grunt jobs we have.

  47. The article on the 30.06 sign is reasonable but quite misleading to the uninformed.
    GC §411.203. RIGHTS OF EMPLOYERS. states. “This subchapter does not prevent or
    otherwise limit the right of a public or private employer to prohibit persons who
    are licensed under this subchapter from carrying a concealed handgun on the
    premises of the business. In this section, “premises” has the meaning assigned
    by Section 46.035(f)(3), Penal Code.
    Employers do not have to post 30.06 signs to prevent employees from carrying at work.
    Your work contract or written company policy is enough to prevent you from carrying at work.

    In fact this issue is discussed in CHL classes and is one of the questions on the Texas CHL test.

    I know of many employers who do not post 30.06 signs yet still prevent their employees from carrying.
    It isn’t scientific but the rather limited use of 30.06 signs in Texas leads me to believe that not posting
    for employees, but rather preventing through work contracts or policy is more the norm.

  48. It’s ridiculous that Texas passed open carry, and I for one, am not looking forward to seeing people walking around with guns out in the open. Law enforcement is going to be kept really busy from all the calls they will be receiving from people that are unsure if the person carrying is good or bad. So now they have put the burden on the patrons of a business to figure that out. I am not opposed to concealed handguns, but do we really have to go around flaunting the fact that we are carrying a gun. There are way too many people with no common sense here to be going back to the wild west days. I hope ALL businesses put up the 30.06 signs and I wish the penalties were even stiffer for those who ignore them!

  49. This article is complete idiocy. Apparently, the idiot author doesn’t believe that private property owners have the right to determine what happens in their buildings even though he claims to believe in individual rights. Hey, moron, Employee Tyler is not required to work at the building with the signage that offends your delicate idiocy. God, you people are dumbasses beyond belief. Expect a “box of dicks” to be arriving at your home any day.

  50. I left the Land of the Gun-happy and Home of the Retarded 27 years ago, moving first to Japan, then to Australia. I’ve enjoyed living in countries where you don’t have to worry about being shot by some trigger-happy cop, gun-toting yahoo, or Rambo wanna-be. America glorifies and celebrates violence. Y’all keep shooting each other up and shooting yourselves in the foot!

  51. Well hate to say this but Employee NICK can’t even LEGALLY – GET ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION EITHER since in most cities it is against the law to carry while onboard
    So Nick is SOL
    Unless you go through a security check to go to work & wear something you can conceal your gun in then carrying CC you shouldn’t have to worry about things even with the sign posted
    Now if you get caught oh well more then likely you will just get a warning or worst fired
    If fired Hey you don’t need to worry about safety going to that job now ??
    Carry professionally & you should be ok & have the safety covered except if you use public transportation
    Now PT is like the job
    Carry CC without getting noticed then your fine
    Again your playing with the laws, but your covering your safety as well until something happens at the bus stop either on or off then your USC
    Don’t blame it on the wrong people
    If the government would stop putting repeat criminals in the revolving door zoos & instead put them in daisy farms then there would be less of them causing safety issues, but the government likes making $$$$$$ off the taxpayers for keeping the zoo occupied & taking care of the trash in the zoo
    I ain’t never seen no over crowded Daisy Farms Yet & don’t think there ever will be, but sure is a lot of over crowded zoos ??
    Blame the criminals & the government not the business

  52. Reasons to ignore 30.06 signs:

    1. No one knows unless you HAVE to use your weapon.
    2. If you have to use your weapon, you are in fear for your life or that of another.
    3. It is better to see a judge than a coroner.
    4. Juries in Texas are lenient on people who love freedom and justice. Ask Joe Horn.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *