Before I ask my question let me post the relevant provisions of the Texas Penal Code:

And then there is the open carry provision:

Basically, 30.06 and 30.07 are the same except for concealed versus open carry. The definition of entry is critical to my question.

First question - do you think it makes a difference if the facility posts two signs or combines the two provisions into one sign such that in pertinent part it reads:

............pursuant to Sections 30.06 and 30.07 of the Texas Penal Code............

and

...........may not enter this property with a concealed or openly carried handgun.....


The Penal Code provisions are very specific with respect to the size of the letters and wording of the signs. There is nothing in them that says that they can be combined. Esoteric legal question - do they fail if they are combined because they are outside of the letter of the law?

As you can see, the provisions are specific with respect to "entry" upon the premises. Suppose you enter the premises, which happens to be on the 4th floor of an office building, without seeing a sign but, later, you discover a huge, arguably compliant sign (never mind the combination of the two provisions for this particular point) above the elevators that is only visible as you are exiting the facility?

You have never been there before. It happens to be a surgical facility that fits the definition of a hospital but Texas law requires hospitals to post such signs if they want to ban handguns.You brought a gun with you because you always bring a gun with you unless you are aware of the prohibition so, next time, you maybe have no excuse but, still, it's an exit sign, not an entry sign.

As a lawyer, I have a significant problem with both the combination of signs and the posting where it cannot be seen upon entry.

And you say...................?????

__________________
Come and take it!!

I am not a lawyer, but I've been told I think like one (never was sure if it was meant as a compliment or an insult... ), so I'll give my take on this.

I'm not sure about this one. I can only go by the sections you've posted, but it seems that 30.06 didn't specify the exact language required for a "no concealed carry" sign to be legally enforceable, unless you left that part out.

30.07(2)(b)(3)(A) uses the word "identical," so I would presume that if the wording didn't match it exactly, it wouldn't be enforceable. So it would seem to me that a combo sign would not be enforceable as far as open carry, but would still be enforceable for concealed carry (again, assuming you didn't leave out any sections saying that specific wording is required).

Two separate signs would seem to me to be legally enforceable, so long as they each met the legal requirements.

As far as "entry" goes, I would agree that if signage wasn't placed at an entrance in accordance with the law, it wouldn't be enforceable. Most of the signage laws I've seen require that signs need to be conspicously visible at the first available entrance to be enforceable for the whole building. Otherwise the signs would only apply to whatever part of the building has the sign at its entrance. I could see someone using that as a valid defense.

With that said, in either situation, I would not want to be the test case.

I picked my nits in thousandths of an inch, not with words and pieces of paper, so I certainly couldn’t speculate on anything like this in Indiana law, much less how the laws of another state might be interpreted, but I will say this about any sign relating to carrying firearms away from my own property: If they don’t want me there, I don’t want to be there.

I’m not a lawyer and I’m going from memory, so that’s always dangerous. To the second part of the OP’s question, in my state (Nebraska), the no weapons signage needs to be conspicuous and it needs to be at all entrances. Even though it’s not Texas, that would be kinda common sense in general, wouldn’t it?

If the signage isn’t conspicuous how can someone see it to obey it? If all the entrances aren’t posted, how can someone know about and be responsible for trespassing if the info wasn’t available to them until after they’ve already entered?

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

I would think a sign at the exit side would not be in compliance. Entry means just that, visible on entry, not exit?? They must have Kalif lawyers writing their laws.

__________________
NRA Cert. Inst. IDPA CSO

Now that you know, upon exit, that they don’t want you carrying then don’t do it or don’t go in.....plenty of other surgery centers across the metroplex to choose from.....

Both signs must be posted at every entrance of the building to be legal. If/when you are asked to leave you must comply. This is what I have been taught.

Regarding the combining of signs: As a lawyer you should already be aware how expensive playing this game can be. As a lawyer you should also be pretty aware that the judge in your case, should it become one, is going to have a higher expectation for you since you are an officer of the court. In a profession that demands networking and getting along with judges I'm not sure you want to start rattling people's cages unless it is your goal to be "that guy".

I'd imagine as a lawyer you are aware of the resources available to you, I'm curious as to why you came here to discuss legal matters. Not that it's against any rules, but what kind of sound legal advice are you expecting from a crowd with an average education MUCH MUCH lower than your own?

__________________
Ban this man,
'89

If I'm on the jury , that sign posted where it can't be readily seen upon entry to a building ...isn't properly posted .
A sign posted where it's seen only as you exit is a set up and not properly posted .

Signs , like EXIT signs , have to be properly posted ...putting an Exit sign where it can't be seen ... then claiming " we posted an Exit sign" isn't going to clear you... a sign has to be posted where it is readily visible and in a proper location .
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

The issue of sign placement (clearly visible in a location that provides adequate notice to anyone entering the premises) seems to be critical, at least to my non-lawyer mind.

That said, I do not want to be put in the position of defending myself in court, with or without a possibly sympathetic jury empaneled.

About 3 years ago I went to the Port Aransas and Rockport area on the Texas gulf coast, met up with a friend from Houston to spend a few days of fishing. Both of us were carrying (my friend with Texas license, me with Colorado permit having Texas reciprocity). Found a very nice restaurant with oyster bar right on the water, went in and had a great lunch (along with a nice cold beer). Paid our bill and left; while going out the main entrance I saw the 30-06 sign posted on the inside of the door facing the interior of the building.

Given the placement of the sign I seriously doubt that a prosecution would have been successful, but I certainly would not want to be detained or arrested, possibly require bail, retain an attorney to represent me, and make another 2000 mile round-trip for each court appearance.

My buddy and I still refer to this incident as our "inadvertent felony". Retired police chief and a licensed professional engineer with MBA degree, and neither one of us can see any way we could have avoided the incident.

Oh well, the smoked oysters were great and the beer was ice cold so it could have been a lot worse.

My view on this.

Those, besides private citizens in their own homes, who do not wish armed people in their premisses should, besides a sign, have an enforced scanner control at the entry and provide the means to safekeep the weapons of those, that being armed, still wish to enter. That would effectively create a "gun free zone" instead of a "feelgood" and dangerous fallacy.

And that should be the "real" law not that "legal gibberish" pretending to be a law.

There. I said it. And feel better already.

__________________
Expect the unexpected

Having spent decades within a large organization, I have a couple of thoughts in the sign location. I'

1. Someone handed some else the sign and told them to "Post this by the door." with no further instructions. Not having any idea of the legal requirements, they did.

2. The insurance company/legal counsel/gun phobic administration decided they wanted to be gun free. Someone who knew the legal requirements purposely posted the sign incorrectly.

2A. The same folks named above intentionally posted it improperly in the hopes they can do a "gotcha" on knuckle dragging gun toters.

I've seen a few no gun decals (Glock in a circle with a slash) posted where it'd be very hard to argue that they are prominently displayed.


About the signs.....if the law indicates that the message on the signs must be identical to what's specified in black letter statute, I'd expect that combining the signs, unless it's a real big sign with both messages, wouldn't pass muster.

I watched signage evolution happen at a large company i worked for for 15 years. They started with “guns prohibited” signs. Then a 30.06 sign at the main entrance. Then at every entrance. Then 30.07 signs at every entrance. They had employees who were also LTC instructors telling them whether they were in compliance or not, and a security team verifying for themselves. I knew one of the LTC instructors, and watched it happen.

The signs must be separated by statute, and both must be posted for both to have the same effect. The law is clear that exact language, with exact letter dimensions, must be displayed at every entrance. Glock in a circle signs dont count. Signs posted at places other than entrances (where you have to enter to see them) don’t count. “No guns” signs dont count. A sign at one entrance when you have more than one doesnt count. A sign at an exit doesnt count. Signs at all ground entrances and not at upper level entrances (say, from a garage or elevated skyway) don’t count. A LTC person could, of course, point that out to building management, but are you gonna?

The signage requirements aren’t hard for a building owner to get right if they follow the instructions in the law. The signage that is done correctly isn’t easy to miss.

Looks like y'all did a little double dipping in the felony department if y'all were drinking while packing. You're absolutely correct, it could have been MUCH worse.

__________________
Ban this man,
'89

That would be state by state, permit by permit. My Kalif permit says no drinking, no bar only while ccw.

__________________
NRA Cert. Inst. IDPA CSO

Legal to carry while drinking in FL. Wise?

30.06
30.07
Or 51% signs properly posted in accordance with the law are the ONLY legal signs in TX.

I abide by them.


Any other feeble attempts like no guns or red circle with line over gun etc I dis regard as if not even there.

IF I am asked by owner/mngmt to leave (for what ever reason they discovered Im armed) I will depart the premises. However I will/have informed them that IF they want me to honor there right/wishes I would like for them to follow the law and POST proper signs in accordance with the statue.

You want me to follow the law I want you to do the same.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We are talking about Texas specifically here if you've been following the thread. However, I doubt there is any state that allows one to be under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol and carry a handgun; its simply too much of a liability.

Without being intimate with your state law I'm going to say no. Like I mentioned above, I'm not familiar with any state that allows the consumption of alcohol while carrying a firearm.

.............................................

I'm very surprised that almost everyone is aware that a sign banning the carry of firearms must be visible at the entrance of the premises, but it appears that several are confused about the fact that drinking while carrying is a big no no, with one of the only exceptions I can think of being special forms of active, but off duty law enforcement, or being a judge. Being intimate with ones local laws, federal rights, and federal liberties are paramount to being a red blooded American and instrumental if one plans to carry a handgun.

Simply put, there are rules a lot of rules, so make sure you read the instruction book.

__________________
Ban this man,
'89

I have seen places that post the sign(s) to cover their butts but don’t care at all if you conceal carry.

If something happens they can say they posted and the carrier can say didn’t see it. BJ’s in Temple is perfect example. 51% sign is posted in the hallway leading to the bathrooms...

For the general education of all, regardless of state, here is the Florida statute:

790.151 Using firearm while under the influence of alcoholic beverages, chemical substances, or controlled substances; penalties.—
(1) As used in ss. 790.151-790.157, to “use a firearm” means to discharge a firearm or to have a firearm readily accessible for immediate discharge.
(2) For the purposes of this section, “readily accessible for immediate discharge” means loaded and in a person’s hand.
(3) It is unlawful and punishable as provided in subsection (4) for any person who is under the influence of alcoholic beverages, any chemical substance set forth in s. 877.111, or any substance controlled under chapter 893, when affected to the extent that his or her normal faculties are impaired, to use a firearm in this state.
(4) Any person who violates subsection (3) commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(5) This section does not apply to persons exercising lawful self-defense or defense of one’s property.

My bolding. So under FL law, not only is it allowable to carry a firearm while having a drink, it is not a violation of law to "use" it in legitimate self defense. So while Florida may no longer live up to its "Gunshine State" reputation, it still recognizes a person right to self defense, even if intoxicated. The morality and liabilities can be debated until the cows come home.

Lolololol

Probably best to leave interpretation of the law to those qualified as clearly you are not. While carrying a gun while drinking in public does appear perfectly legal, under no circumstances are you allowed to use that weapon outside of you own property.

More About Guns and Alcohol in Florida - U.S. & Texas LawShield

Here is a link to what U.S. Lawshield says about alcohol and handguns in Florida. They are a highly regarded firm of defense attorneys specializing in the use of self defense. They seem to disagree with you about using a pistol in self defense while drinking in Florida.

Make sure you understand the law before spreading dangerous misinformation that could land people in prison for a long time.

__________________
Ban this man,
'89

Perhaps you should have read the link you posted, as it restates what I posted--with further explanations. I did not say one could carry in a bar or tavern, but it clearly allowable in FL to sit in a restaurant that serves alcohol and have a drink while carrying.

From the link: "NOTE: Possession of a Firearm While Intoxicated Is NOT A CRIME"

Nothing in the statute, nor the link--which is legal opinion--states one is restricted to one's property. Since the link is discussing possession of firearms in bars and restaurants--neither of which are one's "property," I'm not sure where or how you arrived at that conclusion. One has the right to self defense in FL wherever one has the right to be, use of deadly force included (SYG).

LE certainly has the right to request a blood alcohol test to determine one's level of intoxication if they suspect using a firearm under the influence, but paragraph 5 of the statute specifically states it is not a violation of law to do so in SD. And in any shooting, one should expect scrutiny from LE. Having had a drink certainly will not bolster one's defense, but it is not illegal per FL statute.

Of course, any lawyer will recommend against using a firearm while intoxicated. Duh. But that recommendation will fall short when one's life is threatened. Better to live to face the aftermath, whatever it may be, than to die free from theoretical liabilities.

I apologize to the OP for my part in the highjacking of this thread. I'm a Texan, we were talking about Texas, out of the blue some guy wants to go on about Florida. I should have never entertained him. This is my last post in attempt to help him.

Yes, I read the article I posted. Cmon man... that's why I already conceded that: yes, one can carry a gun while infoxicated in Florida. The use of said fire arm is a different story.

HOWEVER, advice from one of the best legal teams in the county, U.S. Lawshield states "a person who has been drinking alcohol to the point of being impaired or intoxicated should not have the loaded firearm in their hand, much less discharge it" specifically about the state of Florida. This is at the very end of the article, you have to read it all the way through. A wise man would take the advice of one of the best legal teams in the country.

'89 out.

__________________
Ban this man,
'89

Questions I would ask in regards to "Texas" law on no-gun signage:

Is there case law on:

Has any violation of the signage being tossed merely because some "I" wasn't dotted or a "T" crossed?

Has case law established that only the exact wording is lawful, and no more or no less wording is allowed?

Is there any case lawful to define what "conspicuous" is? Or is not?

While the law may state "X," judges and case law may decide "X" also included "Y" or "Z." A judge could rule posting the sign in a hallway to the restroom is significant, or one may rule it has to be on the entry, at eye level, in any conspicuous coloring. Just curious if anything outside of the written statute has been applied previously in TX.

You were stating it was illegal to drink & ccw in general. If it is specifc to texas, then state that. It is in general not allowed by most states but not all..

__________________
NRA Cert. Inst. IDPA CSO

I see this as more of a sound guidance statement, shall not would be a more binding legal term

__________________
Is that a gun No a lifesaver

My understanding of the Texas law, which I've paid attention to because I'm there a few times a year, is that the sign must be at the entry and meet the exact format specified in 30:06 and 30:07.

A lot of people and businesses don't seen to know that because I see a lot of those guns with a line through them decals on windows.

__________________
Can open, worms everywhere.

Sign sign everywhere a sign. Blockin’ out the scenery, breakin’ my mind.