51% signs

[Dr.Wayne]

What is the official take on 51% signs? Honestly, ive seen these like 1-2 times, if any bar has them, they arent in plain view at the front door. Are you expected to just understand its a bar and off limits (when you see tons of drunk people pouring in and out), or are you covered if there is no sign? My CHL instructor told me that its just a matter of a sign being there or not, and if the sign is altered or damaged as to cover any part of the 51% its void. Anyone have any experience with this? Right now, i just use common sense and understand the spirit of the 51% law and just dont carry in those places, but what is the correct answer?

[G.A. Heath]

You have a defense to prosecution if it is not there. If it is damaged you might be able to find a lawyer who may be able to make a case, I personally wouldn't chance it. The TABC website has a search function where you can determine if a place is 51% or not.

[Mike S]

What your CHL Instructor should have told you is that:
(1) if a business derives 51% or more of its income from 'on site alcohol consumption', you are prohibited from carrying there;
(2) it is a defense to prosecution if theres no 51% sign posted;
(3) there are multiple versions of the "51%" sign (falls under the purview of TABC, not the DPS), so be aware that in at least one version the big '51%' is subdued & looks more like a water mark and may not be as obvious as the big, red 51%.

A defense to prosecution doesn't mean you can't be arrested or charged; there's another thread on here somewhere that explains the difference between a defense to prosecution & an affirmative defense, so I'll defer to that unless Charles or another lawyer on this forum could please articulate it here for the sake of clarity.

Another thing your instructor hopefully covered was the offense of 'Carrying Concealed while Intoxicated'. This statute uses the same standard as DUI (.08 BAC, OR in the subjective view of the officer you lack the normal use of your physical or mental faculties). As long as you continue to use the same reasoning & common sense you've executed thus far, you should do fine.

[locke_n_load]

What your CHL Instructor should have told you is that:
(1) if a busuness derives 51% or more of its income from 'on site alcohol consumption', you are prohibited from carrying there;
(2) it is a defense to prosecution if theres no 51% sign posted;
(3) there are multiple versions of the "51%" sign (falls under the purview of TABC, not the DPS), so be aware that in at least one version the big '51%' is subdued & looks more like a water mark and may not be as obvious as the big, red 51%.

A defense to prosecution doesn't mean you can't be arrested or charged; there's another thread on here somewhere that explains the difference between a defense to prosecution & an affirmative defense, so I'll defer to that unless Charles or another lawyer on this forum could please articulate it here for the sake of clarity.

Another thing your instructor hopefully covered was the offense of 'Carrying Concealed while Intoxicated'. This statute uses the same standard as DUI (.08 BAC, OR in the subjective view of the officer you lack the normal use of your physical or mental faculties). As long as you continue to use the same reasoning & common sense you've executed thus far, you should do fine.

There is no definition of intoxicated in the penal code, and an officer may treat someone with the same standards as *DWI as far as arrest goes, but the law does not mention .08 BAC or otherwise.

[Keith B]

There is no definition of intoxicated in the penal code, and an officer may treat someone with the same standards as *DWI as far as arrest goes, but the law does not mention .08 BAC or otherwise.

Actually, there is a definition. It is defined in 49.01 and would be used for carrying as well as driving.

Sec. 49.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
(1) "Alcohol concentration" means the number of grams of alcohol per:
(A) 210 liters of breath;
(B) 100 milliliters of blood; or
(C) 67 milliliters of urine.
(2) "Intoxicated" means:
(A) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into the body; or
(B) having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.

[locke_n_load]

There is no definition of intoxicated in the penal code, and an officer may treat someone with the same standards as *DWI as far as arrest goes, but the law does not mention .08 BAC or otherwise.

Actually, there is a definition. It is defined in 49.01 and would be used for carrying as well as driving.

Sec. 49.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
(1) "Alcohol concentration" means the number of grams of alcohol per:
(A) 210 liters of breath;
(B) 100 milliliters of blood; or
(C) 67 milliliters of urine.
(2) "Intoxicated" means:
(A) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into the body; or
(B) having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.

So if a word or phrase isn't defined in 46.035, it goes with the default definition in the most relevant code? Just wondering not arguing.

[ScottDLS]

There is no definition of intoxicated in the penal code, and an officer may treat someone with the same standards as *DWI as far as arrest goes, but the law does not mention .08 BAC or otherwise.

Actually, there is a definition. It is defined in 49.01 and would be used for carrying as well as driving.

Sec. 49.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
(1) "Alcohol concentration" means the number of grams of alcohol per:
(A) 210 liters of breath;
(B) 100 milliliters of blood; or
(C) 67 milliliters of urine.
(2) "Intoxicated" means:
(A) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into the body; or
(B) having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.

So if a word or phrase isn't defined in 46.035, it goes with the default definition in the most relevant code? Just wondering not arguing.

Yes, but even more to the point the Government Code relating to CHL specifically refers to the definition in Chapter 49.

GC §411.171. DEFINITIONS. In this subchapter:
(1) Repealed by Acts 2013, 83rd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1302, Sec. 14(1), eff. June 14,
2013.
(2) “Chemically dependent person” means a person who frequently or
repeatedly becomes intoxicated by excessive indulgence in alcohol or uses
controlled substances or dangerous drugs so as to acquire a fixed habit and an
involuntary tendency to become intoxicated or use those substances as often
as the opportunity is presented.
...
...
(5) “Handgun” has the meaning assigned by Section 46.01, Penal Code.
(6) “Intoxicated” has the meaning assigned by Section 49.01, Penal Code.

[Keith B]

with ScottDLS pointing to the section of the code referring to 49.01.

[locke_n_load]

Wow, it would make sense for 46.035 to reference that/those docs, have never seen them before.
Thank you Gentlemen.

[brian1973]

New guy here so forgive me if I post this in the wrong spot but I was also told that a restaurant like applebees, chili's, etc may have a 51% sign posted in the bar so you can carry as long as you do not sit in the bar area..correct? I was also told that there was no BAC for carrying a firearm, any amount is over the limit.. I guess reading above that is incorrect.
i will research myself but figured since there was a thread already I would ask the expierenced folks.

[Keith B]

New guy here so forgive me if I post this in the wrong spot but I was also told that a restaurant like applebees, chili's, etc may have a 51% sign posted in the bar so you can carry as long as you do not sit in the bar area..correct? I was also told that there was no BAC for carrying a firearm, any amount is over the limit.. I guess reading above that is incorrect.
i will research myself but figured since there was a thread already I would ask the expierenced folks.

As for the limit on alcohol, the definition is as above. Basically, if you are .08 or above it is defacto intoxication. But even if you are below that level you can be arrested if the officer feels you are intoxicated by definition. It is just more burdensome for the officer to prove the intoxication case without a BAC test.

As for the Chili's, etc, the 51% determination is made by total revenue from sale of alcohol and food sales. When a business applies for a liquor license to sell for on premise consumption, they must define the area that drinks will be served. So in the case of most restaurants they would have to limit the sale and drinking to the bar area AND make more than 51% of their total revenue (food and drink) from alcohol sales to be a 51% location.

So, it would be a very rare case to see this type of scenario at a chain restaurant. You normally see this type of scenario when a contracted company comes in to sell concessions and makes more of their revenue from their alcohol sales. A good example is Bass Performance Hall in Fort Worth. The hall is owned by a different group than who sells the alcohol. The company that sells the alcohol makes more than 51% of their revenue from the sale, and since that company holds the liquor license and they defined the whole building a 'premises' for consumption, then the whole building is off limits for CHL.

[JALLEN]

Does anyone in San Antonio know if Alamo Brewery has signs?

They are having an Octoberfest during the next month, nothing shown in Texas3006.com or on their website

[Taypo]

Does anyone in San Antonio know if Alamo Brewery has signs?

They are having an Octoberfest during the next month, nothing shown in Texas3006.com or on their website

Not sure if they're posted or not (last time I was there was pre-CHL for me) but they're a great group of guys making some pretty good beer. Definitely worth taking the gun off and having a few if you're in their brewery.

[JALLEN]

Does anyone in San Antonio know if Alamo Brewery has signs?

They are having an Octoberfest during the next month, nothing shown in Texas3006.com or on their website

Not sure if they're posted or not (last time I was there was pre-CHL for me) but they're a great group of guys making some pretty good beer. Definitely worth taking the gun off and having a few if you're in their brewery.

I've been drafted to play in the polka band next Friday night and Saturday night.

[Keith B]

Does anyone in San Antonio know if Alamo Brewery has signs?

They are having an Octoberfest during the next month, nothing shown in Texas3006.com or on their website

They should not be a 51% location. They would make the majority of their revenue from the manufacture and sale for off-premise consumption. You more than likely won't even find them on a search for a license since they are a brewery.

Edit to add: They are in the database as Alamo Beer Company. However, the license is a D class, which I believe is for distributor. There is no gun sign listed as they are not set up for on-premise consumption. The only issue might be if they set up a separate entity for Octoberfest and have a biergarten as a stand-alone venue for sale and on-premise consumption. Watch for signs around the drinking area, that should tell you, but not until you are there.