This is topic Lawful Carry of Concealed Handguns in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=001148

---

Posted by Brian Hogan (Member # 940) on 05-11-2004, 07:40 PM:
 
Ohio's law that allows the lawful carry of concealed handguns went into effect on april 8. This law allows concealed handguns to be carried by individuals who have passed a training class and have undergone criminal backround checks. There are now only four states in the union who do not have such a law.

This is all pretty new to those people that aren't very informed on the subject and many private businesses have posted signs banning the carry of concealed handguns on their property.

How do other theatres in states with this law handle it? Do you post signs stating guests are not allowed to carry or do you not? Are you aware of such laws? Do you care? Thanks for any input!

Additional info about diffrent state laws regarding concealed carry can be found at www.packing.org

[ 05-12-2004, 12:59 AM: Message edited by: Brian Hogan ]
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 05-11-2004, 10:47 PM:
 
I carry a concealed weapons license. There are times I do just that....pack heat! Loaded, too.

Sometimes my job might require it.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 05-11-2004, 10:47 PM:
 
Theatres are either private property, owned or leased by the operators, or part of managed retail clusters.

I can't imagine anyone signing a lease that would accept a property manager's requirement to allow weapons into the area that you or your company rents.

If you own your property outright, there's nothing that forces you to allow weapons on your property any more than they're allowed in a public school.

There is no situation I can imagine where you, as a business owner, would be required to allow weapons past the threshold of your business... except maybe a law enforcement officer. Even then (if you're worried about it), if they're not on an official call, you may not be able to relieve them of their weapons, but you don't have to let them into your building, either. While the law may allow weapons under specific circumstances in public places and private residences, that doesn't mean you are forced to do so as well.

Cheeseburgers and bottled soda pop are legal in my state, but I don't let people bring them into my theatre, either.

(edit)
As for Paul... he'd probably be smart enough to keep his "heat" to himself. If I knew he had it however, I'd probably ask him to take it outside. Sorry, Paul... I'm not an anti gun freak... just can't see myself accepting any potential liability for knowing that one was in my building. That would infer a relationship where I knew it was here, yet somehow had informed confidence that a second party could be trusted to maintain it within whatever my personal parameters were. In reality, I've rarely seen that scenario work out very well.
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 05-11-2004, 10:53 PM:
 
I have to clarify my comment. I agree with Jack for the most part. However, the last time I did a "Proof of performance" of an AM radio station, I carried it because of the areas I had to go to get my readings. Some of those places made my hair stand on end....

As an edit for Jack: I can truthfully say I have never carried it in a theater or inside the radio station.

No need to.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 05-11-2004, 10:54 PM:
 
In that situation, I would probably do the same thing!
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 05-11-2004, 11:44 PM:
 
It's certainly not the licensed gun toter you have to be concerned about sticking it in your face. The crime perpetrator doesn't license his gun and couldn't if he wanted to. It the licensed carrier pulled a stick-up he'd be crazy since the cops already have his address, mug shot and prints. A neighborhood grocery here, after several robberies put a .38 in a holster in view on every employee from cashiers to the janitor, Guess What?? No more hold ups. The best criminal is one killed in the commission of his crime. Saves money wasted on a trial.
 

---

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 05-12-2004, 01:00 AM:
 
Before you kick anyone out because they have a gun, you need to check your state laws regarding the prohibition of firearms on certain properties. One of those little signs with a picture of a gun slashed out is not legal in texas. Most concealed carriers will respect their wishes and take their business elsewhere. Of course you have the right to refuse service but if you say it is because of the gun, you may end up with a law suit on your hands.

I commend any LAW ABIDING citizen who carries a gun and makes the world a safer place to live. As stated above, it is the people out there with illegal weapons that you need to worry about.

I wonder how long this topic will be open before people start acting like two year olds throwing a temper tantrum.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-12-2004, 01:10 AM:
 
I have a CHL and have been through the process of meeting the guidelines. As Chris has pointed out, it's not the people who legally carry handguns, it's those who carry them illegally.

Chris is also correct about prohibiting licensed people from carrying a concealed handgun into your theaters. Those little signs that stipulate "no guns on the premesis" mean absolutely nothing legally...at least in the state of Texas. Your theater may be your private property, but unless you meet certain criteria such as being a school or a large amount of your business is derived from the sale of alcoholic beverages, you can not prevent a licensed citizen from carrying on your premesis. Sorry, tough, deal with it.
 

---

Posted by Nicholas Suchyta (Member # 2050) on 05-12-2004, 01:28 AM:
 
In Michigan we've got the CCW permits as well. The restrictions here are that you cannot carry a weapon on school or government property, as well as a few other places. You can legally carry the weapon anywhere, private or not, as long as it's not government or school.
 

---

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 05-12-2004, 03:39 AM:
 
if you disallow weapons in your theater, will you hold them for customers during the show? we do that with food. i'm not arguing that you should be required to do this, although i think most policies should be designed so that, even if the customer is not aware of it before arriving, a way can be found to make an accomodation that allows him/her to see the film.

carl
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-12-2004, 04:55 AM:
 
Sorry, but a manager cannot "hold" a customer's firearm. Even if a police officer was going to hold it or requested the gun, the licensed owner does not have to relinquish it even to an officer of the law (unless they are posing a specific threat to people around them). Likewise, few people will be willing to leave the firearm in their car, for they are responsible for that gun even if some kids break into their car during the show and get ahold of it.

As I said before, there is nothing anyone can do if a licensed person wants to bring it in. They are concealed anyway. The "don't ask, don't tell" attitude works well in this situation. Besides, it is their right to carry and none of your business. Ask any cop, they will all reiterate the fact that the licensed carriers are not the problem, it's those without a license that cause problems.
 

---

Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 05-12-2004, 06:32 AM:
 
I am sure this is not the norm, but it is definitely a good reason for not permitting firearms.
When I was a manager, a family came in one Sunday afternoon to one of the lame-o kid movies (Pokemon 2000). The father had on a fanny pack that we later found out had a gun in it. Appearently, during the movie, he took it off and put it on the floor in front of him since it was not confortable (I guess). He got up, and went to the concession stand. The lights were already down in the auditorium since the movie had started. While he was gone, his wife and daughter went out to the bathroom not knowing that dad had left the fanny pack containing a gun on the floor.
This theater was full of children. Luckily, an usher noticed an unattended bag on the floor and picked it up. It had somehow been kicked into the aisle.
I can only imagine what would have happened if a kid in the theater had openned it up. Luckily, we had an off duty officer working who ended up giving the guy a LONG speech about it. Appearently, the guy that left his gun unattended in the auditorium was an off duty DEA agent.
 

---

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 05-12-2004, 08:10 AM:
 
We have a theatre in Minneapolis, where it is OK to pack. However, signs are posted on every entrance door which states, no firearms allowed. It was weird to see a sign posted like that. Brad is 100% correct; we would not (and I hope no one else) would EVER hold someone's weapon while they watch a film. God, talk about a lawsuit waiting to happen...
 

---

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 05-12-2004, 08:56 AM:
 
A story that I heard out of Tennessee (whether it's true or not, I do not know):

Either an off duty police officer was working at the theatre OR watching a movie. Anyways, the officer's gun ended up getting 'held' in the office. The story comes out of the Hollywood 27 in Nashville. That theatre's manager's office was directly behind the box cashier's station. During the evening the gun somehow was discharged and struck one of the cashiers in the back of the leg. It was said that it accidently went off, but I believe there was an investigation into whether or not the managers were 'playing' with the gun.

As a manager, if I can see the gun -it does not go into the theatre. I have had people walk in the door with a gun in a holster on thier belt - and they were not police officers....
 

---

Posted by Brian Hogan (Member # 940) on 05-12-2004, 09:20 PM:
 
i agree as well with the whole good guys with guns thingy. the banning of concealed guns on private property is part of the ohio law. under the law, private employers may, but are not required to, prohibit the presence of firearms on their property.

on a different note, just to show how weird this new ohio law is, the language of the law regarding CONCEALED carry in a car:

"you may not transport a concealed, loaded handgun unless it is carried in a holster on your person and in plain sight."

plain sight, eh? pretty good concealed carry law.
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 05-12-2004, 11:19 PM:
 
Brian, I am not sure of this...maybe it is picking the fly specks out of pepper.

That law, as far as I can determine is a universal law of many states. The weapon must be in clear sight - and unloaded. I think that was the scope of that law. I believe it applied to personnel who did not have a permit to carry a concealed weapon on his/her person, but were allowed to own such a device.

Anyone can feel free to correct me if my interpretation is incorrect.

Some time ago, I sent an email to Brad on how and what the options were if a licensed carrier of a concealed weapon and the proprietor as well as what the law enforcement personnel's options are in event the business owner complains.

Brad, if you still have that email in your archives, please feel free to post it.

One key point is if a concealed weapons carrier with a valid permit refuses to leave the business establishment, the law enforcement personnel can physically remove that person from the premises and cite that individual for trespassing.

I agree - just like the Texas Highway Patrol says...it is usually not the person who holds the CWP that causes the problems. It is the ones who don't.

Here in Washington State, I have heard of only one incident where a felony was committed by a CWP carrier in the last 10 years. In Washington State, if you have so much as one felony, forget about legally owning a pistol. I presume there are many other states that have the same philosophy.

I remember a couple of years ago when one of our Washington State Troopers pulled me over for passing on the shoulder. I not only handed him my driver's license - I also handed my CWP to him with it. He thanked me for that, and really appreciated it. He asked me if I had my pistol on my person, and I said, "No, it is in the glove compartment." He said "Fine, no problem" - and went back to his patrol car like nothing ever happened, made his call-in, came back to my car and gave me a verbal warning about shoulder passing. He told me to have a great day, smiled, jumped back in his cruiser and "set up shop" a little further down the road.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 05-13-2004, 11:21 AM:
 
In Nevada we have both CCW and "open carry" laws for weapons, i.e. one can carry a weapon if it is in plain sight, otherwise it must be totally concealed--no lumps showing whatsoever. In both cases, in Clark County if the weapon is a handgun it must be registered. Most other counties do not require registration of handguns. However, some cities (Boulder City, North Las Vegas) do have "deadly weapons" laws that make it illegal to carry a weapon in a car, unless one can show that the weapon is being carried for work purposes (casino security guards and the like).

Generally CCWs are not allowed in casinos, public buildings equipped with metal detectors at their entrances, public airports, public schools, or public buildings that display a "no firearms" sign, though building admistrators can issue written permissions to carry CCWs within their jurisdictions. The right of a property owner to restrict the carrying of concealed firearms on his or her property is protected under Nevada law.

Basically anyone 21 years of age or older can get a CCW permit provided they meet the requirements of NRS 202.360 (the list of reasons for denial of a CCW permit is quite long). Nevada CCWs are good for five years, and one must show competency with each weapon on a target range each time one wants to renew a CCW--up to two weapons on each CCW. Both residents and non-residents may apply for a Nevada CCW, but the application must be done in person. Nevada CCWs are recognized in Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana and Utah.

[ 05-13-2004, 12:38 PM: Message edited by: Paul Mayer ]
 

---

Posted by Rob Butler (Member # 2274) on 05-13-2004, 02:33 PM:
 
I don't understand why it would be legal to conceal in a movie theater and not a school or airplane. If you stand up and yell FIRE for no reason, you can get arrested, but having a weapon in a dark room full of people with lots of visible exits seems kinda stupid to me. If the person is a police officer, it makes sense, but for just any Joe Public, it seems unnecessary. You could say that it's alright if the person has a license to carry, but are your ushers going to ask to see the license before allowing this person in? What if the person falls asleep and doesn't feel someone grab the gun from their holster? What if the gun somehow accedentally fires in a sold out show? Who's responsible if someone gets injured or killed accedentally, the carrier, or the theater for letting him in? To me, it just seems like an accedent waiting to happen.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 05-13-2004, 03:29 PM:
 
I think it would be more of a property rights issue. With due respect to Brad, nobody (except the law) has rights to carry firearms on my property if I don't want them there... and I don't care if you have a permit or not. I may not be able to prevent you from carrying a weapon... and I would never accept the liability of storing it for you... but if I knowingly allowed you in my place and something DID happen, I couldn't afford the legal free-for-all that would result.

I haven't had to deal with it (yet)... but I'd tend to think that if I know you're packin (which probably wouldn't happen unless you're showing it off), you won't be stayin'(except for Paul!). It's not ADA, so... my theatre, my rules. I don't think you can trump that.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 05-13-2004, 05:17 PM:
 
If I or my wife are carrying a pistol, you will probably never know it. That's why it's called a CONCEALED weapon. That's the whole point. Bad guys never know whether the person they are about to attack is packing a piece.

The prudent weapon owner knows that there are places that are off limits and wouldn't even think of carrying a weapon in certain situations.

Further, there are times when it's just not needed. If you are in a familiar part of town and the crime rate in that neighborhood isn't worrisome for you, carrying a gun is probably going to be a hinderance. It's just another thing to carry around. You've got your cellular phone, your keys, your wallet, your Palm computer, etc., etc. Ladies have their purse to think about. (Though my wife has a purse with a built-in gun pocket which is pretty neat!) There is a point where the need for security balances out with the responsibility of carrying. If it doesn't balance, you probably would be better off not packing.

Y'Know, if a person carrying a gun stands out from the crowd enough to get themselves noticed, they should think twice about what they are doing.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-13-2004, 05:34 PM:
 
I was watching The Daily Show on Comedy Central last night. They had a story about an Arizona lawmaker wanting to make it legal to carry a concealed weapon into a bar. Now that has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard of. It really has to be a joke, right?

Even if you have a permit to carry a concealed gun, doing so in a bar is just plain irresponsible. You have a few beers, your judgment can get impared and in a bad moment you may do something really stupid. Normally, that just results in a fist fight. If you're fuming out of control, you may reach for that gun, even if it is registered and the police would easily track you down based on the ballistics results (not to mention lots of eyewitnesses). A pretty sizeable percentage of homicides in the United States happen in "heat of the moment" events, in other words un-planned 2nd degree murder.

I have no problem with people having concealed carry permits. Oklahoma has allowed this kind of thing for several years now. But there has to be some limits where guns can be carried. Citizens have to show some discretion. I'm not going to haul a handgun into a hospital. And even if those "no guns allowed" signs on the doors mean nothing legally, any civilian insisting on carrying weapons into places that often post the signs (like churches, schools and hospitals) is acting like an asshole.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-13-2004, 06:25 PM:
 

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

And even if those "no guns allowed" signs on the doors mean nothing legally, any civilian insisting on carrying weapons into places that often post the signs (like churches, schools and hospitals) is acting like an asshole.

---

You should rethink your asshole comment. Let's say you own a business and I am making my rounds servicing and one of the stops I have is in an *undesirable* section of town with a super high crime rate. Of course I will have my gun on that trip. Should I happen to patronize your establishment after my daily stops, of course I am going to bring it in with me. No way in hell will I leave it in my car. As stated earlier, should some kids break into my car and get my gun while I am inside your business, I am completely responsible for anything that happens, even though it was the kids who committed the crime. Think about that...especially if those kids in the parking lot are playing with the gun and the kids accidentally shoot your wife/kids as you two are exiting the building. Oh yeah, I'm an asshole for keeping the gun on my person like the law permits instead of potentially letting some kids get ahold of it just because the storeowner is nervous at the idea and wants to put up a sign. Real smart there.

BTW, before you come back with the whole "that isn't safe" argument, it is my personal common practice that if I am going to be in a place I feel is safe that I unload the gun before entering and keep the ammunition in my pocket.

The really funny part is everyone who is getting their panties in a wad over this probably has no clue just how many thousands of guns have been through their building in the last several weeks/months/year (depending on the neighborhood).
 

---

Posted by Rob Butler (Member # 2274) on 05-13-2004, 08:02 PM:
 
One thing I've always found funny about conceiled weapons, ever notice in a John Wayne movie how everybody hides their gun in their pants pointing down. Out of all the places that I would hate to have a gun go off accedentally, that's gotta be the worst!
 

---

Posted by Dominique Replogle (Member # 2387) on 05-13-2004, 08:46 PM:
 
thats why I use a pancake holster. Very subtle
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-13-2004, 09:29 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

Let's say you own a business and I am making my rounds servicing and one of the stops I have is in an *undesirable* section of town with a super high crime rate.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

There are times where a gun probably should be left at home, locked in a gun safe.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

As far as my "asshole" comment goes, that's just how its going to play in real life. People in this thread are saying the "no guns allowed" signs mean nothing. That's fine. But, I'd like to see the candid reactions of front desk people in a hospital or some white collar business if a guy comes in and says, "I can carry my gun where ever I want regardless of what your sign says." The front desk people are going to think the guy is jerk. If you're going to carry a gun into a hospital, make sure no one will be aware you have it.

---

You are so far out in left field it's not even funny. The laws DO NOT PERMIT the carry of a firearm in a school or hospital! They don't even have to post a sign.

The issue here is that you are not familiar with the gun requirements and as such are speaking without fully understanding the law and people's rights. When people say that a "no guns" sign at a theater means nothing, that is true. I can walk right past one of those little signs posted in a theater packing and be 100% compliant with the law and there is not anything that anyone can do about it. I do not have any such option at a hospital. Sign or no sign, I cannot take a gun in there.

You also keep forgetting that we are talking about concealed handguns by licensed people. If it is concealed, you don't even know who is carrying anyway to accuse them of being a jerk or an asshole. With that in mind, it's going to be kind of difficult for the front desk to know if someone is bringing in a gun anyway, and it might also interest you to know that people carrying cannot announce that they are carrying to other people. Geez! What's your point??? Oh wait, there isn't one. You are making up hypotheticals that simply do not exist per the law.

Please read up on the law before resorting to name calling. The same could be said for people voicing their stern opinion on things which they are ignorant of.
 

---

Posted by Gordon Bachlund (Member # 124) on 05-14-2004, 08:49 AM:
 
For a little comic relief, consider this piece of "history"...

When I was a kid growing up in Los Angeles, one of the great pleasures in my pre-pubescent life was being dropped off at the Hitching Post Theatre in Hollywood, a venue that featured Western films exclusively and was immensely popular with the kid set, for an afternoon double feature. Given its name and predilection for Westerns, most kids wore cowboy outfits complete with gun belts and holsters with cap pistols. Mindful of kids’ penchant for participatory play, the theatre required that its customers check their weapons at the box office prior to entering, each kid receiving a numbered “hat check” with which to retrieve his sidearm after the show.

“Those were the days…..” 
 

---

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 05-14-2004, 03:36 PM:
 
According to the following section of the Texas Code, it is a Class A misdemeanor to carry a concealed handgun onto "property of another without effective consent":
-------------------------------

§ 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY
CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed
handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.

(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice
if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
(c) In this section:
(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section
30.05(b).
(2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by
Section 46.035(f).
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written
language identical to the following: "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"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) It is an exception to the application of this section
that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1261, § 23, eff. Sept. 1,
1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, § 9.24, eff.
Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1178, § 2, eff. Sept. 1,
2003.
--------------------------
Ron Yost .. not saying anyone is 'right' or 'wrong' .. just hoping to avoid trouble for our well-intentioned host.
 

---

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 05-14-2004, 06:03 PM:
 
one thing about the law: it's rarely cut-and-dried. people's inalienable rights are constantly butting up against the inalienable rights of others. and the law, with all its studied precision, is amazingly inconsistent and vague about some things.

quote:

---

The laws DO NOT PERMIT the carry of a firearm in a school or hospital!

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

If it is concealed, you don't even know who is carrying anyway to accuse them of being a jerk or an asshole. With that in mind, it's going to be kind of difficult for the front desk to know if someone is bringing in a gun anyway, and it might also interest you to know that people carrying cannot announce that they are carrying to other people. Geez! What's your point??? Oh wait, there isn't one. You are making up hypotheticals that simply do not exist per the law.

---

quote:

---

(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
Etc, etc, etc...

---

quote: Carl Martin

---

what if you're packing and you have to go to the hospital?

---

In that instance you have no choice but to leave it in your car. My instructor recommended that it be unloaded and to make sure that the gun is seperated from the ammunition (such as the gun underneath the front seat and the ammunition in the trunk) to further deter things. Last I checked though, car break-ins aren't too common at hospitals.

quote: Andy Muirhead

---

I must admit I find the idea of ordinary civilians 'packing heat' absolutely terrifying.

---

It's different in every state, so there is no easy answer. At minimum you have to pass a competency test as well as a written test and know all of the applicable laws. Each person also is fingerprinted, their gun(s) registered and the FBI starts a file on them. In my opinion, a state which permits citizens the right to concealed carry is a safer state. Any dunce can do the basic math and realize that there will always be criminals who carry, and those are the people who are a problem. At least in those states where people can obtain a license to carry legally, those criminals have no idea who is "packing" or not. In regards to licensed people going crazy and running around shooting people, that would be about the stupidest possible thing they could do. Remember, EVERYTHING about licensed people is WELL documented and there is no way they could get away with killing someone. The evidence would be everywhere. As such, a state with a carry law does not turn itself into the "old west".

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

Overall it comes down to a manners thing.

---

quote: Andy Muirhead

---

I must admit I find the idea of ordinary civilians 'packing heat' absolutely terrifying.

---

I find it just the opposite.
 

---

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 05-14-2004, 11:28 PM:
 
Apparently, this is the LANGUAGE of the "30.06 sign" (curious numerical designation):
-----------------------------------------------

"PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06, PENAL CODE (TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF A 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."

"CONFORME A LA SECCIÓN 30.06 DEL CÔDIGO PENAL (TRASPASAR PORTANDO ARMAS DE FUEGO) PERSONAS CON LICENCIA BAJO DEL SUB-CAPITULO H, CAPITULO 411, CODIGO DE GOBIERNO (LEY DE PORTAR ARMAS), NO DEBEN ENTRAR A ESTA PROPIEDAD PORTANDO UN ARMA DE FUEGO."
----------------------------------

I could find NO actual specification for the sign itself online (size, acceptable colors, etc.), except the 1"-high minimum letter size stated in the code which, in itself, means it would be fairly large. Even the Texas Department of Public Safety's site has NO official design specs. All they have is the language (that's where I cut-and-pasted the text from -- the all-caps are theirs, not mine, and they don't say whether that's a requirement either.)

Government sucks.
Enuf, already.
Ron Yost
 

---

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 05-15-2004, 12:07 AM:
 
I am inclined to agree winth Randy 100%. I can assure you that you do not want cops and the GOV to be the only people allowed to protect themselves. One of the first things that Adolf Hitler did when he was elected was to remove the guns from the germans he wanted out. It worked very well for him.

"1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-15-2004, 12:23 AM:
 
I always laugh when a government or other business entity specifies "block" for use as the preferred letter style on a sign. With the zeal of lawyers needing to get paid for nitpicking one would think they would be aware of the problem they're inviting upon themselves.

There is an actual font family called "Block;" however, I don't think it is the one they intend for use. Normally what they want is Helvetica. But hell, you could switch out Helvetica with Univers, News Gothic, Franklin Gothic, Akzidenz Grotesk or even Gill Sans, Avant Garde or Futura and the lawyers wouldn't know the difference -until someone counter-sued.



Incidentally, the 1" letters thing doesn't make for quite as large a sign as I would have thought. Using the verbiage Ron posted, and setting it in Helvetica55 Medium you could make the type work in a 36" X 24" space. If you want to throw in a red circle-slash over a gun symbol, make the sign an even 3' X 3'. It's not huge. But then it isn't something that's going to fit on a door's window glass either.

On a different matter, I own guns, but not to protect myself from the government. In this age of high technology, it is pure folly to think you'll manage to protect yourself from "the government" with a single gun. These days, things like information and perception and spin of reality is more powerful than bullets.

I'm not worried much about street criminals either. I don't make much of a target in that regard.

The thing I fear is some ordinary shlep flipping out and "going postal". The heat of the moment stuff between people who know each other is what gets more citizens killed than anything else. Instead of fearing strangers, I think many in this country need to look into anger management instead.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 05-15-2004, 03:38 PM:
 
I don't think they mean to specify a particular face, and I can't imagine you're really serious. The OED defines a "block letter" as a "block capital" (there's also a definition involving wood blocks and movable type, but we won't go there), and a block capital is defined as merely sans-serif.

(Those are from definition 23 of block, n.).

I expect that the real point is to ensure that they are printed legibly, rather than handwritten in cursive or mixed case and bad penmanship.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-15-2004, 03:55 PM:
 
That question was actually brought up in my class. According to the instructor, the signs do not have to be a specific font, so long as they are completely clear to read. I would tend to agree that requiring a specific font isn't what is happening here.

He also noted that every sign he has seen for sale that meets the legal requirements is in all caps. The sign is also to have black letters on a white background, or white letters on a black background (100% contrasting letters.)
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 05-15-2004, 05:24 PM:
 
If I feel that I need to have a gun in order to go to a movie, than maybe I should stay home, instead of knowingly endangering others. No movie is good enough. None. Even trained people, even police officers have accidents happen involving their weapons.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-15-2004, 06:04 PM:
 
Well Chris you sort of predicted right on the first page, but as I figured it would be moreso people twisting others words around.

Jeremy, perhaps you should never leave the house again. People take their concealed firearms into grocery stores, hair salons and McDonald's too all the time. This is far from being a "theater" thing. You are around licensed people who carry them concealed every single day and just don't know it. Time to wake up. Besides, I think you will find that most carrying people do feel safe enough in a theater environment and don't carry there. You're just twisting words around.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 05-15-2004, 10:54 PM:
 
Yeah, I guess youre right. But what I meant was, personally, if I felt that I needed a gun with me to go anywhere, maybe I shouldnt be going to those places. Im more than sure that you dont take your gun with you everywhere you go do you.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 05-15-2004, 11:45 PM:
 

quote: Jeremy Fuentes

---

...knowingly endangering others...

---

quote: Ron Yost

---

A PERSON LICENSED UNDER SUBCHAPTER H, CHAPTER 411, GOVERNMENT CODE (CONCEALED HANDGUN LAW), MAY NOT ENTER THIS PROPERTY WITH A CONCEALED HANDGUN.

---

Does this mean that a person NOT licensed to carry a gun may enter with a concealed weapon!? (Okay, okay... Humor. ) But, it goes to the next point. It has been said several times in this thread: The problem is NOT with licensed people carrying handguns. It is with UNLICENSED people (criminals) carrying them. The whole point of a license (Driver's license, Electician's license, gun license or any other kind of license) is to help ensure that a people do a certain activity in the safest possible way and to correct/punish those who don't. Licensed gun owners are no more of a menace than licensed drivers.

quote: Jeremy Fuentes

---

...if I felt that I needed a gun with me to go anywhere, maybe I shouldnt be going to those places.

---

All free, law abiding citizens have the right to go wherever they want, whenever they want and they have the right to be safe in their person and property when they go there. They can go on public property without explicit permission, they can go on private property with implicit permission (e.g.: To enter a place of business.) and they can enter private property, within reason, to seek permission. (e.g.: Walk up to your front door and ring the doorbell.)

In the exercise of that right, there are times when others will try to commit crimes against you. (Robbery, assault, etc.) Generally speaking, the police are supposed to protect you from those kinds of crimes but it's not logical to assume that they can protect everybody all of the time. Therefore, every free, law abiding citizen over the age of majority has the right to protect himself (and others around him) from crime using whatever (legal) means he sees fit.

If a person chooses to carry a gun, has obeyed the law and shows no signs of endangering others with it that is his right. Nobody can do anything against that.

Just because somebody else is afraid of things that make loud noises there's no reason for me to walk on eggshells all the time!
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 05-16-2004, 12:44 AM:
 
Just abide by the rules of your state.

Jeeze, everybody should know by now that crooks, thugs, drug dealers, etc. have no respect for the law in the first place. They are the ones that you have to be careful of.

I would say that just about ANY any responsible CWP holder will abide by the wishes of the property owners who may not like the idea of a handgun on their property. So what's the big deal? The property owner has the trump card. End of story.

Same holds true for private residences. If the household involved has a rule of "No guns allowed in their house", that is exactly what they mean. Again, any responsible CWP holder will abide, WITHOUT QUESTION, that request.

If one has a problem (like I would have) about leaving the firearm in the car where it could be stolen, then you have two options.

1. Take the damn thing home and lock it in your safe or:
2. Get the hell off the property as requested by the property owner until such time as you wake up and realize the property owner also has rights.

I don't know of any CWP holder that would be willing to jepardize his or her permit to carry a concealed weapon by flaunting the laws governing the carrying of said devices.

You have the right to "Bare Arms". As far as I understand, you do not have the right to carry a concealed pistol unless you are qualified to do so. Any felony will disqualify you from doing that.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-16-2004, 01:54 AM:
 
Okay, if people really have a bug up their ass about getting guns out of the hands of criminals, they really need to write their congressman on what kinds of guns to ban.

100% of the people serving in the US House of Representatives and US Senate (and likely the President and all the folks in the Surpreme Court) are f**king idiots when it comes to gun control laws.

Example: the assault rifle ban. Doofus!!!!

Assault rifles are not cheap. Most are piece-of-shit weapons not worthy of a good fence post (and YES I do mean the AK-47 crap-o-rama rifle). Pure garbage! Give me a Winchester Model 70 .300 Magnum with 1 shot in the chamber bolt lock capacity, and I'll plant some AK holding wannabe on his back. The deadliest thing on the battlefield is ONE well aimed shot.

But assault rifles are NOT at all the weapons used typically in most gun-related homicides, especially when it comes to street-level, gang-oriented crime. The kind of guns they typically use are those cheap little .22 and .25 ACP handguns that cost only around $100 and can be thrown down a storm drain after a murder has been committed.

Who in the living hell is going to ditch a Heckler and Koch MP-5 sub-machinegun after blasting somebody? The damned rifle costs over $3,000 (if you can even manage to buy it anywhere legally in the world anymore). If you have a prized weapon you're going to be particularly careful about how it is used, especially in matters of defending yourself.

If our f**king dopey, stupid government wants to make an impact against gun related crimes, they'll drop their dumbass assault rifle ban and do something sensible such as banning those cheap-ass throw-away .22 and .25 hideaway handguns. I doubt if too many self-respecting gun owners out there would have much of a problem with that.

If some gun fan has a problem with banning cheap shit weapons, I will laugh at them for being such a stupid cheapskate when it comes to protecting their life. You cannot buy a good, new handgun for under $500. You can't hit shit with those tiny, cutesy gangbanger handguns that cost under $100. They jam. They stovepipe. They will get your ass killed in a bad situation.

If you are serious about protecting yourself with a handgun, you pack a more legitimate piece, such as a Sig Sauer P226 or a Walther, or H&K M7P9. Or if you like the classic revolver, I highly recommend the Smith and Wesson Model 629 .44 Magnum. You have your choice of wood grips or Pacmar grips, whichever your perfer. You don't buy shitty junk when it comes to handguns. Ban the cheap crap, put those cheapie shit maker gun companies under and you'll make a serious dent in the gun crime problem.

But then after that, we'll all likely have to fill out paperwork to buy a Louisville Slugger baseball bat. You can bet if the homeboys in Compton, CA can't shoot each other with guns costing under $100 they'll be beating each other's brains in with baseball bats. Those assholes.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 05-16-2004, 02:01 AM:
 
Sorry for the misunderstanding of my statements. What I meant to say was would you want someone in your place of business that is most likely going to use a gun, and not just for possible protection. If someone came in to your business, and looked nervous and/or paranoid, and you noticed they had a gun, you couldnt kick them out because its not against the law for them to have it.(I mean here in Texas) Even worse, if someone plans on using the gun, but doesnt look nervous at all. That makes me nervous, I dont know about you. What I meant about knowingly endangering people with a gun is the same thing as a licensed driver, driving drunk, or a licensed electrician, ignoring safety rules. Once again sorry for the misunderstanding.
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 05-16-2004, 02:10 AM:
 
Most CWP holders will never tell you they are carrying it unless you know those people personally. That's just the way it is.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-16-2004, 02:15 AM:
 
Well, Jeremy, that gets back to the point I made earlier about people carrying guns past those "no guns allowed" signs. Some argue about the right to protect themselves with guns. Others may argue about having the right to a safe workplace totally absent of guns.

So I make the personal choice of not carrying a weapon into most public businesses, regardless of whether they have a "no guns" sign posted or not. I treat others how I wish to be treated. I sure as f**K don't want any customer who is still A STRANGER looming over my desk packing heat. Our company does not allow employees to carry guns onto the premises. So I sure don't want anyone else doing the same. Sorry, but if I don't know you I sure will not trust you. Trust is only something that is earned. It is not an automatic thing.

Now if I am doing something that puts me at risk, such as hauling around a lot of money or some highly valuable property, you can count on me being armed to the teeth. I have a reason to do it.

And that's really what it comes down to and why there has to be some sensible discretion made when it comes to granting citizens concealed weapons permits. I don't think it should be very easy to get one. Here in Oklahoma, all you have to do is sign up for a $200 class, attend and the permit is yours.

Ulimately, you want any gun owner who carries a concealed weapon to know the heavy responsibility he bears in doing so. Many people see how police officers get into a lot of trouble over a misstep in a volatile situation where their service gun was used. The stupid thing is most citizens don't realize those same rules apply to them. Sorry, but they DO.

Oklahoma has this stupid "make my day" law that has lots and lots of potential of getting home owners in trouble. Many in Oklahoma have the very wrong belief that if someone breaks into their house it is perfectly okay for them to shoot and kill the intruder. Little do they realize if the intruder turns out not to be armed, they can go to jail for 2nd degree murder or at least manslaughter. Federal law supercedes all of these dopey, misleading "make my day" laws. If an unarmed man invades your home you have NO right at all to kill him unless he arms himself in some way. If you have the sightposts lined up on him as he picks up a knife out of your kitchen, then you can dispatch the son of a bitch. But not before then unfortunately.
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 05-16-2004, 02:38 AM:
 
Bobby, I think you will discover that I support your opinion in your last post.

If some SOB enters my home in a burglary or something like that, I will do my very best to hold that person at bay until the police arrive. However, if that individual makes a threatening advance on me or any guest I may have in my home with the intent of doing bodily harm, I'll blow that intruder's ass to kingdome come.

Also, I think assault weapons should be banned. That is a device that is for the military...Not the average Joe Blow citizen.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-16-2004, 01:12 PM:
 
A couple of my friends are police officers. Their advice on the "make my day" law is this. Plant a weapon on him if he is unarmed (such as a butcher knife or a cheapie .22 handgun), or at the very least keep telling the police, "I was in fear for my life." Do not say anything aggressive like, "I'm glad I blasted that f**ker to hell." It is so easy to wind up going to jail for killing a home intruder.

I do agree assault rifles are not meant for use by the average citizen. There really isn't much purpose to it. First, most assault weapons on the market, such as a Tek-9 or Chinese SKS rifle (the civilianized version of the AK-47) are junk. I laugh at people wanting to go hunting with such rifles. Give me a good bolt-action Remington or Winchester with one shot capacity and I'll be happy.

And assault rifles are crap for home defense. If you're going to use a rifle sized gun to defend your home, you're better off with a good shotgun. If the intruder is in the house, you'll at least have a chance to blast a couple shots in his general direction and be virtually guaranteed of hitting him somewhere. With a rifle, if you miss he may be able to get to you and start wrestling with the gun. Compact sized handguns are the best for home / personal defense because an assailant would have a harder time getting the weapon from you. Not enough barrel to grab. Heckler & Koch makes a very good 9mm that is fairly small in size but shoots a very very tight group right out of the box.

I guess to get to the point, an assault rifle ban should not be very necessary since any gun owner with good sense would likely pass up the things anyway. The only motive I see with owning one is so you can modify it to be fully automatic. And even there, I kind of chuckle. Full auto weapons waste lots of expensive ammo really really fast.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 05-16-2004, 02:39 PM:
 
I agree with you Bobby. Its a matter of trust. In a smaller business its easier because you have a familiarity with the people and you trust them. But in larger businesses, like Wal-Marts, mega-plexes, malls, amusement parks, I guess the law here in Texas is, I have to trust those thousands of people I have never seen before, because a few of them took some $200 class. I dont think so.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-16-2004, 02:54 PM:
 
Jeremy, why am I supposed to believe you know how to drive your car properly? Just because you passed some lame driver's ed test doesn't mean you don't have your head up your ass and won't drive me off of the road.

Don't you ever drive again. You are endangering others!!!
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 05-16-2004, 05:13 PM:
 
Brad, you make a valid point.

I don't get what all the hub-bub is about!

Here in Los Angeles, it's not a "permit" thing. *EVERYONE*, a legal resident or "illegal alien resident", all have the God-given "right" to carry a concealed and loaded handgun where ever they want. And, to drive a motor vehicle without a driver's license or liability insurance.

It's becoming the "American" way.

>>> Phil
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 05-16-2004, 05:50 PM:
 
Brad, what is this drivers ed test that you speak of? I never heard of it.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-17-2004, 06:05 PM:
 
Crappy, dangerous drivers can make my blood boil. You have the road menaces who blaze down residential streets at 70mph. And then you have those other folks who insist on driving 20 to 30mph below the posted speed limit. Lots of people get into car accidents trying to avoid either type of driver.

I'm foggy on the current statistics, but it seems like somewhere in the neighborhood of 50,000 Americans are killed on US highways every year. Our homicide rate is, what, about 20,000? And not all of those killings come from guns either (plenty of stabbings, poisonings, bludgeonings, etc.). But gun crime captures far more press attention than a highway accident death.

Alcohol-related accidents are usually punished pretty hard and rightly so. But now we're seeing a jump in inattentive driving related accidents and road deaths from things like people yakking endlessly on their damned cellphones. Cellphone use has become a leading cause in road accident deaths, with alcohol retaining the lead. It would be interesting to see how many deaths are caused from carry permit guns versus cellphones used in cars. I have a strong feeling cellphones would come out far more deadly in the statistics.
 

---