TexasCHLforum.com

My Grandma told me "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime".

Yeah, that could have been anything! Unless you saw it, no way she could tell it was a gun! To answer your question, I rarely go out to drink because I am not a beer drinker and mixed drink prices make me mad. The few occasions I do go out drinking, I don't carry my firearm on my person at all and I make the other person drive. Very few people have ever seen me order a drink while having a meal. I am way to cheap for that one too. I would also never try to carry past a metal detector that is located in a place that is legally posted.


Something else. Your question can't realisticly be answered in the affirmative. First, it would be against forum rules to say you would carry past a 30:06 sign and second, I am not sure how smart it would be to make it a public record that you are breaking the law.

i did not read the whole thread,,did a quick search of old threads,,but i am no good at this computer stuff,,,my question is what about a place that has and old unlicensed sign,,or is 51 % but not posted ?

2up1down wrote:

Texas Dan Mosby wrote:No.

Establishments that do not support my rights as an armed citizen do not receive my business, and I have no reason to frequent 51% establishments.

Absolutely, sad thing is Saxet and High Calibre Gun shows also post 30.06 so that put's them on my off limits list too.

This is not always easy to do. For one thing, I don't remember ANY gun show not being posted. Not just the two you mentioned. So would never be able to attend any gun show? They post some events at AA center. I would never attend an event there? How about the Post Office? I can never again buy a stamp? In theory it sounds real good, but in actual practice, it is not realistic at all.

cnovel wrote:i did not read the whole thread,,did a quick search of old threads,,but i am no good at this computer stuff,,,my question is what about a place that has and old unlicensed sign,,or is 51 % but not posted ?

I would carry right on in. Non-Compliant signs don't apply to a CHL holder. The 51% thing is not likely. If it does not have the sign... ... I assume it is not 51%. I can't be held legally in violation if there is no sign. How on earth would I ever know what volume of business is booze with no sign?

03Lightningrocks wrote:

cnovel wrote:i did not read the whole thread,,did a quick search of old threads,,but i am no good at this computer stuff,,,my question is what about a place that has and old unlicensed sign,,or is 51 % but not posted ?

I would carry right on in. Non-Compliant signs don't apply to a CHL holder. The 51% thing is not likely. If it does not have the sign... ... I assume it is not 51%. I can't be held legally in violation if there is no sign. How on earth would I ever know what volume of business is booze with no sign?

Allow me to correct this. The law says it is illegal to carry on a 51% location, as determined by TABC. It does not say that you have to know it is so determined. Fortunately, last session a defense to prosecution was passed if the location is not properly posted. That means you still stand a good chance of getting arrested but you should win in court. It does shift part of the burden of proof to you, in that you must prove your defense. How are you going to prove the sign was not there? I feel confident that it will be there by the time you get bond posted and can get back to take a picture. Your arrest would remind them that they need the sign.

srothstein wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

cnovel wrote:i did not read the whole thread,,did a quick search of old threads,,but i am no good at this computer stuff,,,my question is what about a place that has and old unlicensed sign,,or is 51 % but not posted ?

I would carry right on in. Non-Compliant signs don't apply to a CHL holder. The 51% thing is not likely. If it does not have the sign... ... I assume it is not 51%. I can't be held legally in violation if there is no sign. How on earth would I ever know what volume of business is booze with no sign?

Allow me to correct this. The law says it is illegal to carry on a 51% location, as determined by TABC. It does not say that you have to know it is so determined. Fortunately, last session a defense to prosecution was passed if the location is not properly posted. That means you still stand a good chance of getting arrested but you should win in court. It does shift part of the burden of proof to you, in that you must prove your defense. How are you going to prove the sign was not there? I feel confident that it will be there by the time you get bond posted and can get back to take a picture. Your arrest would remind them that they need the sign.

Actually to be really technical, the law says carryng a handgun AT ALL outside of your premises or car is illegal. Having a CHL, or being a LEO, or one of the other (46.15) non-applicability provisions, only provide a Defense to Prosecution. This is per case law according to Chas. So theoretically you risk arrest if you're a cop and carrying, but you should win in court.

ScottDLS wrote:

srothstein wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

cnovel wrote:i did not read the whole thread,,did a quick search of old threads,,but i am no good at this computer stuff,,,my question is what about a place that has and old unlicensed sign,,or is 51 % but not posted ?

I would carry right on in. Non-Compliant signs don't apply to a CHL holder. The 51% thing is not likely. If it does not have the sign... ... I assume it is not 51%. I can't be held legally in violation if there is no sign. How on earth would I ever know what volume of business is booze with no sign?

Allow me to correct this. The law says it is illegal to carry on a 51% location, as determined by TABC. It does not say that you have to know it is so determined. Fortunately, last session a defense to prosecution was passed if the location is not properly posted. That means you still stand a good chance of getting arrested but you should win in court. It does shift part of the burden of proof to you, in that you must prove your defense. How are you going to prove the sign was not there? I feel confident that it will be there by the time you get bond posted and can get back to take a picture. Your arrest would remind them that they need the sign.

Actually to be really technical, the law says carryng a handgun AT ALL outside of your premises or car is illegal. Having a CHL, or being a LEO, or one of the other (46.15) non-applicability provisions, only provide a Defense to Prosecution. This is per case law according to Chas. So theoretically you risk arrest if you're a cop and carrying, but you should win in court.

Personally, I would take that bet. What kind of sorry cop would lie and claim the sign was there when it wasn't ?

03Lightningrocks wrote: Personally, I would take that bet. What kind of sorry cop would lie and claim the sign was there when it wasn't ?

Cops are people, well trained people, but nevertheless people. I do not think most LEO's would intentionally lie about what they saw, but time can fade memories and recollections.

steveincowtown wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote: Personally, I would take that bet. What kind of sorry cop would lie and claim the sign was there when it wasn't ?

Cops are people, well trained people, but nevertheless people. I do not think most LEO's would intentionally lie about what they saw, but time can fade memories and recollections.

Arresting me while I am proclaiming there is no sign would not be something the officer would forget. It would be made a special point of. All the way down to me insisting he get others involved in his decision and me insisting he take note that the establishment is not posted.

Realisticly, the odds of getting arrested in a situation like that are right up there with getting hit by lightning. First... I would have to be in a place with no 51% sign that is actually 51%. Second... I would have to expose my weapon. Third... somebody would have to notice it. Forth... the person who saw it would have to freak out and call a cop. If a security gard with xray vision spotted the weapon, he would most likely approach and ask if I was a cop. Otherwise, cops all over the place would be getting other cops called on them for having a gun. Someone in this very forum mentioned seeing a lady at some park or something the other day with a gun in OC mode. Everyone here responded that it must have been a cop.

If by some chance I was temporarily ignorant enough to allow my concealed weapon to be exposed and a person saw it, most would assume I was a cop. Gangsters would assume I was a homie. These kind of discussions always seem to get out on the edge of "never going to happen land". I am going to say that my belief is that very few places are failing to post 51% signs when they should be. I am not really a bar hopper type so maybe I am wrong. Either way, I can't get busted for something nobody knows about.

I would never proclaim there was not a sign, as then the officer might be kind enough to point out the sign you did not see. But, your point below is well taken. Concealed is concealed and the odds against this being a problem...ever...are slim to zip.

03Lightningrocks wrote:Realisticly, the odds of getting arrested in a situation like that are right up there with getting hit by lightning.

ScottDLS wrote:

srothstein wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

cnovel wrote:i did not read the whole thread,,did a quick search of old threads,,but i am no good at this computer stuff,,,my question is what about a place that has and old unlicensed sign,,or is 51 % but not posted ?

I would carry right on in. Non-Compliant signs don't apply to a CHL holder. The 51% thing is not likely. If it does not have the sign... ... I assume it is not 51%. I can't be held legally in violation if there is no sign. How on earth would I ever know what volume of business is booze with no sign?

Allow me to correct this. The law says it is illegal to carry on a 51% location, as determined by TABC. It does not say that you have to know it is so determined. Fortunately, last session a defense to prosecution was passed if the location is not properly posted. That means you still stand a good chance of getting arrested but you should win in court. It does shift part of the burden of proof to you, in that you must prove your defense. How are you going to prove the sign was not there? I feel confident that it will be there by the time you get bond posted and can get back to take a picture. Your arrest would remind them that they need the sign.

Actually to be really technical, the law says carryng a handgun AT ALL outside of your premises or car is illegal. Having a CHL, or being a LEO, or one of the other (46.15) non-applicability provisions, only provide a Defense to Prosecution. This is per case law according to Chas. So theoretically you risk arrest if you're a cop and carrying, but you should win in court.

Not exactly correct. 46.15(b) says that 46.02 does not apply. Defense to prosecution is not mentioned and is not relevant as there is no offense to prosecute. That covers "common" exceptions such as traveling (2) and hunting (3), along with a CHL (6).

steveincowtown wrote:I would never proclaim there was not a sign, as then the officer might be kind enough to point out the sign you did not see. But, your point below is well taken. Concealed is concealed and the odds against this being a problem...ever...are slim to zip.

03Lightningrocks wrote:Realisticly, the odds of getting arrested in a situation like that are right up there with getting hit by lightning.

I believe if there was a 51% sign I did not see, I would be done for. Not sure on this one.

jordanmills wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

srothstein wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

cnovel wrote:i did not read the whole thread,,did a quick search of old threads,,but i am no good at this computer stuff,,,my question is what about a place that has and old unlicensed sign,,or is 51 % but not posted ?

I would carry right on in. Non-Compliant signs don't apply to a CHL holder. The 51% thing is not likely. If it does not have the sign... ... I assume it is not 51%. I can't be held legally in violation if there is no sign. How on earth would I ever know what volume of business is booze with no sign?

Allow me to correct this. The law says it is illegal to carry on a 51% location, as determined by TABC. It does not say that you have to know it is so determined. Fortunately, last session a defense to prosecution was passed if the location is not properly posted. That means you still stand a good chance of getting arrested but you should win in court. It does shift part of the burden of proof to you, in that you must prove your defense. How are you going to prove the sign was not there? I feel confident that it will be there by the time you get bond posted and can get back to take a picture. Your arrest would remind them that they need the sign.

Actually to be really technical, the law says carryng a handgun AT ALL outside of your premises or car is illegal. Having a CHL, or being a LEO, or one of the other (46.15) non-applicability provisions, only provide a Defense to Prosecution. This is per case law according to Chas. So theoretically you risk arrest if you're a cop and carrying, but you should win in court.

Not exactly correct. 46.15(b) says that 46.02 does not apply. Defense to prosecution is not mentioned and is not relevant as there is no offense to prosecute. That covers "common" exceptions such as traveling (2) and hunting (3), along with a CHL (6).

"Does not apply" in 46.15 has been held to mean a Defense to Prosecution by an appellate level court. This is apparently case law per a posting Chas. had made earlier (which I don't feel like looking up).


EDIT: Ok I looked it up.... viewtopic.php?f=7&t=42491&p=512485" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I will follow the law and not carry in a validly prohibited place.

However, The House of Blues is not a 51% establishment, sign or not. Both the Dallas and Houston locations have a food and beverage license, so they can't be 51%. If they have a 51% sign posted, then it is posted incorrectly and someone needs to notify the TABC regional field office for the area and ask them to investigate the signage being improperly posted.