Is this right ?

[Aurelius]

Originally Posted by Feather

The whole thing is only one sentence and the various parts are separated by commas. The controlling portion of the sentence is the first part that states, "PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06,...." Since there is no relevant Section 30.06 in California law, the whole sign is meaningless and unenforceable. I am disheartened that so many persons who posted here would be so willing to obey an invalid sign. My license to carry a concealed firearm was extremely hard to get, I consider it essential, I feel honored to have it, and I am NOT going to abdicate my CCW rights according to the license I was issued based on a flawed and unenforceable sign.

No doubt the sign as it readsis unenforceable, but I believe that the sentiment--no guns here-- is enforceable by a demand that you pick up and leave. But if you are CCW, how will they know? If I were a clerk at a shell station in the middle of nowheresville at 0300 hrs, you can believe I sure as hell don't want to see ANYONE other than a LEO walk through the door with a gun.

[Justaguy]

(heavy sigh)....

While, technically, it's not a bad argument that TX law doesn't apply in CA,
imagine standing in front of the Judge as the prosecutor is pointing the the PICTURE of the handgun with a circle and a slash through it.

And you're going to explain that you didn't know the property owner didn't want concealed firearms on their property HOW? Ask yourself what a reasonable person would infer from that sign...

Once again, I thought we work hard to AVOID being a test case.

[Keith92555]

Originally Posted by Justaguy

(heavy sigh)....

While, technically, it's not a bad argument that TX law doesn't apply in CA,
imagine standing in front of the Judge as the prosecutor is pointing the the PICTURE of the handgun with a circle and a slash through it.

And you're going to explain that you didn't know the property owner didn't want concealed firearms on their property HOW? Ask yourself what a reasonable person would infer from that sign...

Once again, I thought we work hard to AVOID being a test case.

[THE Gimper]

Originally Posted by Justaguy

(heavy sigh)....

While, technically, it's not a bad argument that TX law doesn't apply in CA,
imagine standing in front of the Judge as the prosecutor is pointing the the PICTURE of the handgun with a circle and a slash through it.

And you're going to explain that you didn't know the property owner didn't want concealed firearms on their property HOW? Ask yourself what a reasonable person would infer from that sign...

Once again, I thought we work hard to AVOID being a test case.

I agree. As I said, it counts as trespassing since you were adequately notified.

[derringer]

The only thing that matters is what your Sheriff thinks when he reviews the complaint.

[CCWInstructor]

Originally Posted by Feather

My license to carry a concealed firearm was extremely hard to get, I consider it essential, I feel honored to have it, and I am NOT going to abdicate my CCW rights according to the license I was issued based on a flawed and unenforceable sign.

Great! This sign warned you no guns allowed. Leave or look at trespassing. It is not unforceable. They have the right to refuse service to anyone.

[G36 Steve]

Originally Posted by Feather

The whole thing is only one sentence and the various parts are separated by commas. The controlling portion of the sentence is the first part that states, "PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06,...." Since there is no relevant Section 30.06 in California law, the whole sign is meaningless and unenforceable. I am disheartened that so many persons who posted here would be so willing to obey an invalid sign. My license to carry a concealed firearm was extremely hard to get, I consider it essential, I feel honored to have it, and I am NOT going to abdicate my CCW rights according to the license I was issued based on a flawed and unenforceable sign.

Yes, we get it. It's a Texas 30.06 sign. It's a Texas law and you cannot be prosecuted under it in California. However, if you walk past that sign and you are found to be CCW you are subject to enforcement of the provisions in PC 602.
Additionally, and here's the really bad part, if you choose to ignore "N0 GUN" signs, rules or policies, your issuing agency may revoke your CCW based on their finding of you exercising poor judgment.
As hard as it was to get a CCW and as much as you value it is it worth the risk to ignore the signage?

[swdr]

Think of it as two messages, one of which is the "No Guns" logo. What you do is your choice, but in trying to be reasonable I would not want to cross that logo.

[THaves]

In reality I did not cross into the Shell Facility. I did not know the specific code but you can see the owners intent is clear.

Also this facility was a Rack ( where tanker trucks fill up with petroleum product ready for transportation to the stations) . Firearms and a couple million gallons of Gas do not go together.

Great sign though, glad you all enjoyed.

[Tom98915]

In a nutshell, they lost my business (if any) and my $$$ and Iwill tell all my friends not to go there too, which is even more business $$$ lost for them. Too bad.

[THaves]

Originally Posted by Tom98915

In a nutshell, they lost my business (if any) and my $$$ and Iwill tell all my friends not to go there too, which is even more business $$$ lost for them. Too bad.

Tom, just so you know this was not a gas station, it was a Shell facility that stores millions of gallons of gas. Not defending the sign just making sure you have the facts

[Tom98915]

Originally Posted by THaves

Tom, just so you know this was not a gas station, it was a Shell facility that stores millions of gallons of gas. Not defending the sign just making sure you have the facts

oh ok. My bad.

[Firestar]

Originally Posted by swdr

Think of it as two messages, one of which is the "No Guns" logo. What you do is your choice, but in trying to be reasonable I would not want to cross that logo.

Whether you know there are millions of gallons of fuel or not, if the sign had a lighter with a line through it envoking the wrong penal code or state - or whatever... what would the reasonable person do? No brainer.

[flyer898]

My analysis starts with the fact that nothing in the California Penal Code obligates me to respect that sign and only the issuing authority is allowed to place restrictions on my CCW. The Sheriff in Mendocino County has not placed a restriction on my permit that obligates me to respect that sign. I think that extending PC 602 to include a situation where a CCW holder ignores a "no ccw here" sign is stretching it too far. I would not file trespass charges because the holder of a valid CCW entered a business that posted a no firearms sign. I might file charges based on how the fact the person was carrying came to be known. But that would not include somebody seeing the gun print. If a person is carrying and is asked to leave, they probably should honor that request.

Concealed carry means CONCEALED. Unless I draw my gun to shoot someone, the fact I am carrying should never be known.

[CCWInstructor]

Originally Posted by flyer898

My analysis starts with the fact that nothing in the California Penal Code obligates me to respect that sign and only the issuing authority is allowed to place restrictions on my CCW. The Sheriff in Mendocino County has not placed a restriction on my permit that obligates me to respect that sign. .

That is the worst analysis I have ever seen. With a attitude like yours. ALL ccw holders are in trouble in this state.

Do the rest of the state a favor and please turn it in.

You MUST respect that sign. It is on private property. They, not your sheriff or Penal Code have final say. Your CCW does not give you the right to carry where YOU want to. You have the right to carry where private property owners allow you to carry.