TexasCHLforum.com

Abraham wrote: ↑Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:56 am If one 'knows' that carrying at a bar is a 'no-no', I wouldn't. Unless you like to risk your LTC and take the ride.

I really don't need a sign.

I already know the rules with or without it.

Observing the rules is part of being grown-up.

Sidewalk lawyering about signs and/or their absence or presence is ...silly and comes with consequences.

Nor would I bother sticking my nose into the business's business.

If they fail to post a sign it's not my business to tell them they must or presume I can carry, cuz (with my bottom lip sticking out) theirs no stinkin sign. Please, you know better...

There are quite a few establishments with TABC licenses where it is not completely clear upon entering whether they receive 51% or more of their sales from alcohol. The alternative is avoid any on-premise TABC establishment while armed. This is the whole point of requirement for posting a sign. Sothat you may rapidly ascertain whether carry is legal and act accordingly.

Keith B wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2013 9:35 pm

bizarrenormality wrote:You could but what's the benefit to getting rid of a defense to prosecution?

Because it is only a defense to prosecution, not an exception. You can still be charged and taken to court and then you will have to prove you didn't know it wasn't a 51% location. Better to know it is with a 51% sign and then not carry or maybe not even go there.

As are all the 46.15 non-applicability provisions like: Having LTC, being a LEO, engaged in sporting activity, traveling, etc. All of these are defenses to prosecution rather than exceptions. Defenses, exceptions, not being illegal, etc. are all just different shades of the "burden of proof" under the penal code. My contention is that it is incorrect to say that "something is illegal, but you have a defense or an exception". It's more that the prosecution has a different level of effort to prove you are guilty of something for which you have a Defense, Affirmative Defense or Exception. The act itself wasn't illegal if you had the Defense at the time you committed it.

And if you are prosecuted for something for which you had a Defense, the PROSECUTION must refute your Defense BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT as long as you bring it up. I'm still waiting for some LEO to be the test case for carrying "while being a cop"...which is only a Defense.

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.2.htm