Texas3006 Forum

Hey guys! I've been mia - working 2 jobs.
So I have a question regarding the 30.05 signs.
I've noticed HEB changed from the 30.07 to the 30.05. It does read the gun has to be licensed. I would love to update the area around me but when I Google correct signage all kinds of stuff comes up. Including one that says at 30.05 means no guns licensed or unlicensed. So where do I find a factual sign so I can update information? And what do I do to update it? The map still shows it as a 30.07.


Kathy Pratt

30.07 means no open carry by a CHL. 30.05 means no carry by an unlicensed person at all. Some of the debate is that the 30.05 sign says that no one may carry there, but people don't read the whole law where subsection (f) says it doesn't apply to a person with an LTC and carrying a pistol concealed or in a holster.

There is more vagueness on the 30.05 sign than on the 30.06 or 30.07 signs. The latter require identical wording to the law, while the 30.05 sign only requires substantially similar language.

On a separate note, my local H.E.B.'s have added 30.05 signs but left the 30.07. I take this to mean an LTC can still carry there concealed.

There may even be more vagueness in that possibly a gunbuster sign may be a valid 30.05 sign. Texas Law Shield lawyer told me that. The only thing one can say is that a LTC holder can carry if only a 30.05 or gunbuster sign is posted.

rotor wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:50 pm There may even be more vagueness in that possibly a gunbuster sign may be a valid 30.05 sign. Texas Law Shield lawyer told me that. The only thing one can say is that a LTC holder can carry if only a 30.05 or gunbuster sign is posted.

I had a Texas Law Shield sales rep tell me the same thing about the gunbuster sign. I believe they are incorrect as a gunbuster sign is NOT substantially like the wording of 30.05

Here's the 30.05 excerpt from texas.gov:

(c) A person may provide notice that firearms are prohibited on the property by posting a sign at each entrance to the property that:
(1) includes language that is identical to or substantially similar to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.05, Penal Code (criminal trespass), a person may not enter this property with a firearm";
(2) includes the language described by Subdivision (1) in both English and Spanish;
(3) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(4) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

Let's say a gun buster sign somehow meets (c)(1) because pictogram is a language, and the sign is conspicuously posted at each entrance (c)(4). It's not in both English and Spanish. It is also not in block letters 1 or more inches high (pictograms don't use letters). Since it doesn't satisfy subdivision 2 or 3, it's not valid.

bblhd672 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 11:02 am

rotor wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:50 pm There may even be more vagueness in that possibly a gunbuster sign may be a valid 30.05 sign. Texas Law Shield lawyer told me that. The only thing one can say is that a LTC holder can carry if only a 30.05 or gunbuster sign is posted.

I had a Texas Law Shield sales rep tell me the same thing about the gunbuster sign. I believe they are incorrect as a gunbuster sign is NOT substantially like the wording of 30.05

This is why you don't trust salesmen.

I think the problem is the actual wording of the law...
c) A person MAY provide notice that firearms are prohibited on the property by posting a sign at each entrance to the property that: etc.

The wording is MAY and not shall or must and this is specifically what Texaslawshield told me. I argued that the exact wording was needed but the subtle use of MAY instead of must or shall can be interpreted in many ways, not that you want to be tested for. To me it means you may or may not need the specific wording included in the law.

Regarding the use of "may": A person may but need not post a sign prohibiting the carry of firearms. If you chose to post one, for it to be effective, it must conform to the law.

At least that's how I read it and how, I think, a reasonable judge would read it.

KLB wrote: ↑Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:47 am Regarding the use of "may": A person may but need not post a sign prohibiting the carry of firearms. If you chose to post one, for it to be effective, it must conform to the law.

At least that's how I read it and how, I think, a reasonable judge would read it.

Unfortunately when I contacted Texas Lawshield attorneys they said that a gunbuster sign would be sufficient and that using the exact 30.05 language was not needed. So, perhaps our legislators will clear this up in a future session. Note also that we lost the right to bring long guns in with a 30.05 or it's equivalent.
Please note that I strongly supported your interpretation until Texas Lawshield weighed in. Who knows what a judge would decide.

rotor wrote: ↑Mon Jan 24, 2022 12:17 pm Unfortunately when I contacted Texas Lawshield attorneys they said that a gunbuster sign would be sufficient and that using the exact 30.05 language was not needed.

You asked a group that depends on you being scared into buying their services, and they gave you an answer intended to scare you into buying their services.

That's like asking the "service writer" at your factory auto dealer if you need a transmission and coolant flush and nitrogen in your tires.