Page 2 of 8
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 12:16 pm
by txinvestigator
propellerhead wrote:I carry at Chili's all the time. Often, I sit in the bar are because tables are almost always readily available. I'm a non-smoker but I can tolerate sitting in the smoking section at Chili's.
So, have we decided whether the bar at restaurants were off-limits?
If the bar has a license separate from the establishment, then yes it would be off limits separate from the restaurant.
An easy way to tell is to look for the sign at or near the restaurant entrance that explains it is "unlawful for a person to carry a weapon on the premises unless
the weapon is a concealed handgun of the same category the person is
licensed to carry under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code."
If that sign is at the entrance, then the entire premise is under the TABC license. If not, but there is a sign at the bar, then it is likely the bar has a license and the restaurant is not part of the license.
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 12:26 pm
by txinvestigator
Russell wrote:However if the place has an "unlicensed weapon" sign, then you're golden. Right? :)
Unless it derives 51% or more....... You get my drift.
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:45 pm
by kauboy
What TX means is that if they have a license to sell alcohol, then they must have the "unlicensed weapons" sign. It also means that the entire restaurant is covered by it. Now, if the either, or both, sides of the establishment generate a combined 51% of sales due to alcohol, then you cannot carry there.
However, if they have the "unlicensed weapons" sign, and you are positive that they do not meet the "51%" req, then yes, you are "golden".
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:51 pm
by txinvestigator
kauboy wrote:What TX means is that if they have a license to sell alcohol, then they must have the "unlicensed weapons" sign. It also means that the entire restaurant is covered by it. Now, if the either, or both, sides of the establishment generate a combined 51% of sales due to alcohol, then you cannot carry there.
However, if they have the "unlicensed weapons" sign, and you are positive that they do not meet the "51%" req, then yes, you are "golden".
Yes. However, I have seen some places where the "bar" has its own license and is separate from the restaurant. In that case, the bar is a no-go, but the restaurant is good.
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:10 pm
by propellerhead
Let's continue with the Chili's example. Let's assume there are no 30.06 signs....
So if the bar's license only applies to the bar, then it most likely falls in the 51% category, which means I could not carry at the bar. The restaurant part would be ok. The "unlicensed possesion" sign would typically be posted at the bar. On the other hand, if the license covers the bar AND restaurant as one, then most likely they do not fall under the 51% category, which means I can carry anywhere in the restaurant. The "unlicensed possesion" sign in this case would typically be posted at the main entrance. Does that sound about right?
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:14 pm
by txinvestigator
propellerhead wrote:Let's continue with the Chili's example. Let's assume there are no 30.06 signs....
So if the bar's license only applies to the bar, then it most likely falls in the 51% category, which means I could not carry at the bar. The restaurant part would be ok. The "unlicensed possesion" sign would typically be posted at the bar. On the other hand, if the license covers the bar AND restaurant as one, then most likely they do not fall under the 51% category, which means I can carry anywhere in the restaurant. The "unlicensed possesion" sign in this case would typically be posted at the main entrance. Does that sound about right?
yes
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:10 pm
by KBCraig
propellerhead wrote:Let's continue with the Chili's example. Let's assume there are no 30.06 signs....
So if the bar's license only applies to the bar, then it most likely falls in the 51% category, which means I could not carry at the bar. The restaurant part would be ok. The "unlicensed possesion" sign would typically be posted at the bar. On the other hand, if the license covers the bar AND restaurant as one, then most likely they do not fall under the 51% category, which means I can carry anywhere in the restaurant. The "unlicensed possesion" sign in this case would typically be posted at the main entrance. Does that sound about right?
No matter what class of license they have, any restriction applies to the entire
licensed premises. You don't know the limits of the premises without seeing more paperwork than they've got posted on the wall. While you should never say never when it comes to the crazy-quilt Texas alcohol rules, a general rule is that you cannot leave the licensed premises with a drink.
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:38 pm
by txinvestigator
KBCraig wrote:propellerhead wrote:Let's continue with the Chili's example. Let's assume there are no 30.06 signs....
So if the bar's license only applies to the bar, then it most likely falls in the 51% category, which means I could not carry at the bar. The restaurant part would be ok. The "unlicensed possesion" sign would typically be posted at the bar. On the other hand, if the license covers the bar AND restaurant as one, then most likely they do not fall under the 51% category, which means I can carry anywhere in the restaurant. The "unlicensed possesion" sign in this case would typically be posted at the main entrance. Does that sound about right?
No matter what class of license they have, any restriction applies to the entire
licensed premises. You don't know the limits of the premises without seeing more paperwork than they've got posted on the wall. While you should never say never when it comes to the crazy-quilt Texas alcohol rules, a general rule is that you cannot leave the licensed premises with a drink.
You are correct. However, for TABC licensing, a business inside a presmises CAN be individually licensed.
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:45 pm
by KBCraig
txinvestigator wrote:KBCraig wrote:No matter what class of license they have, any restriction applies to the entire licensed premises. You don't know the limits of the premises without seeing more paperwork than they've got posted on the wall.
You are correct. However, for TABC licensing, a business inside a presmises CAN be individually licensed.
Yes, that's my point: the individual licensee inside will have its own "premises description" within the license, which might or might not extend to a portion of the larger premises.
Case in point: you can (theoretically) have a bar in a mall. The licensed premises will
not be the entire mall, and there will probably be signs at the bar exit, warning customers that they can't carry drinks past that point.
Whatever those "licensed premises" limits are where drinking is allowed, are the same boundaries that CHLs must observe.
Kevin
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:58 pm
by txinvestigator
KBCraig wrote:txinvestigator wrote:KBCraig wrote:No matter what class of license they have, any restriction applies to the entire licensed premises. You don't know the limits of the premises without seeing more paperwork than they've got posted on the wall.
You are correct. However, for TABC licensing, a business inside a presmises CAN be individually licensed.
Yes, that's my point: the individual licensee inside will have its own "premises description" within the license, which might or might not extend to a portion of the larger premises.
Case in point: you can (theoretically) have a bar in a mall. The licensed premises will
not be the entire mall, and there will probably be signs at the bar exit, warning customers that they can't carry drinks past that point.
Whatever those "licensed premises" limits are where drinking is allowed, are the same boundaries that CHLs must observe.
Kevin
said much better than I did.
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:36 pm
by propellerhead
Thanks. I emailed Chili's to ask about the branch near me. I'll post their reply if any.
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:56 pm
by Mike1951
When the CHL law was first passed and went into effect in '96, I recall Chili's as one of the business's that posted.
In June 2003, I had an exchange with then Chili's Director of Security:
Bill Heine
Brinker International
6820 LBJ Freeway
Dallas, TX 75240
I told him I hadn't eaten at Chili's for 7 years because of the initial posting. Anyway, sometime prior to 2003, they began posting only the 'Unlicensed Possession' sign.
BTW, all of the Pappas restuarants posted in 1996 and I have never eaten at another of their establishments. (That's pretty hard to do in the Houston area.) Anyone know their current attitude?
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:53 pm
by Roger Howard
Russell wrote:S&W6946 wrote:I don't know why you couldn't sit at the bar counter while carrying if its not posted 51% or 30.06
ive had seperate dissenting opinions saying that bar counters at restaurants can be posted 51%, while the remaining business is not
Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:02 am
by Lucky45
kauboy wrote:
§ 411.20 NOTICE REQUIRED ON CERTAIN PREMISES.......However, it strictly points out that only the "sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption" is counted toward the 51% tally.
But, like you said, even if they don't post it, it's still our responsibility to know and act accordingly.
What really puzzles me is that subsection(b) says that a hospital "shall" display as well. Does this follow the same logic as "we should know it even if they don't show it"? Even if a hospital doesn't display this sign, can we still carry there? I know that 30.06 says we can't if a proper 30.06 sign is present, but why include this section here?
According to
PC 46.035 Unlawfal Carrying of Handgun by CHL (i).... Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor
was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.
(b)(4) is on the premises of a licensed hospital or nursing home.
So if they do not post on a hospital then you can legally carry there. A bar does not have to post.