Question I hadn't considered about a 51% location... (patio)

[Scott in Houston]

I have been invited to meet some friends at a 51% location later this week after work. It's a typical bar, and has a patio out front. (Baker Street Pub in Sugar Land in the town center).
You can you sit outside and never set foot inside the building.

Can you carry in that scenario? I would think you could, but am not 100% sure. (I guess I'm about 51% sure! ) I could also see it becoming a 'take a ride, beat the rap' thing.

Is there anything definite on this issue like the schools? (The school building being off limits, but not the grounds)

[Teamless]

That is a great question.
I guess I would answer it this way.

Can there be alcohol on the patio that you could be on? if so, then it 'should be' considered the bar, and thus 51%
Also, what IF you have to use the bathroom, I would guess you would have to walk inside to do so.

As you so appropriately stated, you may be beat the rap, but not the ride, if caught.

[Scott in Houston]

Good points...

If I was drinking, I wouldn't be carrying anyway. But if I'm not drinking, it *should* be ok... I think.
Also, there are other bathroom facilities nearby. There's a Cafe Express that is not 30.06 or 51% that's less than 15 yards with a bathroom.

Also, my thought was this, the patio is on a public sidewalk. In fact, it is split in half by a walkway to the public. There's a patio directly attached to the establishment, and more patio next to the street with a sidewalk that runs in between. I've walked through that walkway many times while carrying. I've even seen friends and stopped and chatted a bit there, while armed. But I was not seated or drinking. It's a typical "sidewalk cafe" type of setup.

[texanron]

I wonder if it would make a difference as to which establishment owns the chair you park yourself in.
It sounds like if its a public sidewalk with access for folks just walking by to get to the other businesses like the Cafe Express you should be fine.

[Scott in Houston]

I wonder if it would make a difference as to which establishment owns the chair you park yourself in.
It sounds like if its a public sidewalk with access for folks just walking by to get to the other businesses like the Cafe Express you should be fine.

These are definitely owned by Baker Street Pub. I'm not sure that would matter... it may.
Cafe Express has their own chairs/tables next door. It's not a common ground shared by multiple establishments. If you're eating or drinking at these particular tables, you're being waited on by an employee of Baker Street Pub.

[RiverCity.45]

Remember, it is the business that is 51%. That's what matters, not where you chair is located while on the business's premises.

[Scott in Houston]

Remember, it is the business that is 51%. That's what matters, not where you chair is located while on the business's premises.

Are you sure that's what matters? Where is that stated?

For example, I can't walk into the building to use the restroom of a 51% even if I'm not doing business there. So it's not the business that matters necessarily. In that case, it's the premises and location.
Also, if I was across the street and ordered a sandwich delivered to me, and they brought it, I wouldn't be in violation even though I'm doing business with them.

[Kythas]

If the patio area is served by employees of the business, then the patio is considered premises of the business and would be off limits.

At least, that's what I've been told. After all, I am not a lawyer, but have a friend of a friend who's cousin's aunt knows one.

[MoJo]

I think we have a To-may_to/To_ma_to situation. If you have to ask if it's OK and you are getting ambigious answers then don't do it or, get clarification from the TABC.

[Scott in Houston]

I think we have a To-may_to/To_ma_to situation. If you have to ask if it's OK and you are getting ambigious answers then don't do it or, get clarification from the TABC.

I agree. That's why I said it may be 'take a ride, but beat the rap' scenario.
I realize a lot of this is conjecture, but hey, this is the internet. That's what we do! :)


FYI, I don't plan on carrying. I don't want to play in that gray area, and I plan to have a few sips of the devil's brew.

[Katygunnut]

Or if you are lucky ewnough to find parking right next to the sidewalk, you could still be within a few feet of your weapon while it is in your car.

I would think that this is a tricky situation, especially given that the sidewalk goes through the eating area. There are a number of restaurants on the Riverwalk in San Antonio that have similar seating arrangements. In these types of locations, you can eat an entire meal and never set foot near the building. IANAL, but I believe that the notification requirements are not as strenuous for a 51% location. Still, it seems a bit tough to require patrons to abide by the 51% restriction when there is no way they could see a posted sign during the normal reasonable course of their visit (I'm assuming that they don't have signs posted in the outside seating area). Again, I don't even know if notification is technically required for a 51% location.

[hirundo82]

srothstein has discussed this in previous threads, but it has been a while. It seems to be very much a "you'll beat the rap but not the ride" situation. Here's how I understand it.

The 51% restriction for carrying is a PC §46.035 restriction, which all apply to the premises.

Penal Code Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.
(b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, on or about the license holder's person:
(1) on the premises of a business that has a permit or license issued under Chapter 25, 28, 32, 69, or 74, Alcoholic Beverage Code, if the business derives 51 percent or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption, as determined by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission under Section 104.06, Alcoholic Beverage Code;

(f) In this section:
(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

This is different from the definition of premises in the Alcoholic Beverage Code, which delineates where the establishement can serve alcohol. There, premises is defined as follows:

Alcoholic Beverage Code Sec. 11.49. PREMISES DEFINED; DESIGNATION OF LICENSED PREMISES.
(a) In this code, "premises" means the grounds and all buildings, vehicles, and appurtenances pertaining to the grounds, including any adjacent premises if they are directly or indirectly under the control of the same person.

Now the Penal Code definition is what matters for CHLs, but it is a distinction that many officers aren't likely to be aware of.

[Katygunnut]

srothstein has discussed this in previous threads, but it has been a while. It seems to be very much a "you'll beat the rap but not the ride" situation. Here's how I understand it.

The 51% restriction for carrying is a PC §46.035 restriction, which all apply to the premises.

Penal Code Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.
(b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, on or about the license holder's person:
(1) on the premises of a business that has a permit or license issued under Chapter 25, 28, 32, 69, or 74, Alcoholic Beverage Code, if the business derives 51 percent or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption, as determined by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission under Section 104.06, Alcoholic Beverage Code;

(f) In this section:
(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

This is different from the definition of premises in the Alcoholic Beverage Code, which delineates where the establishement can serve alcohol. There, premises is defined as follows:

Alcoholic Beverage Code Sec. 11.49. PREMISES DEFINED; DESIGNATION OF LICENSED PREMISES.
(a) In this code, "premises" means the grounds and all buildings, vehicles, and appurtenances pertaining to the grounds, including any adjacent premises if they are directly or indirectly under the control of the same person.

Now the Penal Code definition is what matters for CHLs, but it is a distinction that many officers aren't likely to be aware of.

So assuming that you do not plan to drink, then its a choice between the likelihood of taking a ride versus the likelihood of being left without adequate means of defense. Interesting decision, since prior to taking a ride, your means of concealment would need to fail, someone would need to notice, someone would need to be concerned enough to call the police, and the police would neeed to be ignorant of the law. Even if we assume a 95%+ chance that the police won't know the law, the likelihood of everything in this chain of events all occurring simultaneously has to be extremely low. And even then, its just a ride, not a rap.

That would need to be compared to the likelihood that you might need a weapon (along with its own chain of events occuring).

I think we can all agree that the consequence of being unarmed when needed (higher probability of death) is worse then the consequence of an arrest that will not actually hold up (lost time, money, and possible embarrasment). Accordingly, the odds of the arrest would need to be much higher than the odds of needing a weapon before it made sense to leave the weapon in your car.

Each person will need to do the math for their own situation and decide what the best course of action is for them.

[sugar land dave]

That is one of the better areas of Sugar Land, and Sugar Land has recently been listed as one of America's safest cities as determined by crime statistics. Now if you have to leave Sugar Land and go into Houston to work.......

Great question though! Thanks!

[RiverCity.45]

Remember, it is the business that is 51%. That's what matters, not where you chair is located while on the business's premises.

Are you sure that's what matters? Where is that stated?

For example, I can't walk into the building to use the restroom of a 51% even if I'm not doing business there. So it's not the business that matters necessarily. In that case, it's the premises and location.
Also, if I was across the street and ordered a sandwich delivered to me, and they brought it, I wouldn't be in violation even though I'm doing business with them.

I had in mind a single business that was not within a larger building (not, for example, a multi=story building, of which the 51% business occupied only a portion). So a bar within a hotel may be 51%, making it off limits, but not the entire hotel. A patio where the 51% business serves customers, in my opinion, is clearly off limits. Going to the restroom within a 51% marked business is a no-go, too, in my opinion, since it's not what you do there, but that you are there that makes you subject to the 51% rule. Of course having them deliver does not make you subject to the 51%. You're way over-thinking it. I'm referring to being on the premises of the business. IANAL and we are all free to take whatever risks we like.