[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 51% Question (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 8/19/2016 6:38:43 PM EDT
| OK, here is the situation, a bar, actually a microbrewery, has an on premises license to sell. It is posted 51% at both entrances. However, they have outside tables that are effectively on the street. If I do not ever pass through the very obvious doors with the very obvious signs, could I sit at the outside table and order a beer from the server person? |
|
Quoted:
OK, here is the situation, a bar, actually a microbrewery, has an on premises license to sell. It is posted 51% at both entrances. However, they have outside tables that are effectively on the street. If I do not ever pass through the very obvious doors with the very obvious signs, could I sit at the outside table and order a beer from the server person? Are the tables part of their premises? |
|
Quoted:
Are the tables part of their premises? Quoted:
Quoted:
OK, here is the situation, a bar, actually a microbrewery, has an on premises license to sell. It is posted 51% at both entrances. However, they have outside tables that are effectively on the street. If I do not ever pass through the very obvious doors with the very obvious signs, could I sit at the outside table and order a beer from the server person? Are the tables part of their premises? Nope, they are on the sidewalk outside the building, it is a wide sidewalk. |
|
Quoted:
Nope, they are on the sidewalk outside the building, it is a wide sidewalk. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
OK, here is the situation, a bar, actually a microbrewery, has an on premises license to sell. It is posted 51% at both entrances. However, they have outside tables that are effectively on the street. If I do not ever pass through the very obvious doors with the very obvious signs, could I sit at the outside table and order a beer from the server person? Are the tables part of their premises? Nope, they are on the sidewalk outside the building, it is a wide sidewalk. I've never been to a bar/restaurant where the waiter served me outside their premises. With that said, I'd expect you to run afoul of open container law if town has ordnance since you are taking the position you're on public property. Is it worth the ride, loss of license, and attorney fees to argue width of sidewalk? I think you already answered your own question. |
| As someone who has been lawfully licensed to carry a firearm by two different states and has lawfully carried a firearm for more than 12 years, I would never advocate anything other than strict adherence to the law. Now, just because I have never experienced, seen or heard of a police officer ever stopping a law abiding citizen to determine whether or not they were carrying a gun, does not mean that I would suggest that a law abiding citizen with a concealed firearm could, should or should even consider carrying a firearm in a situation that may even skirt the possibility of violating the legal statutes. |
| Thanks for the comments guys. The server was outside and folks were having a beer on the tables outside. Server was serving them, brewery is right on the main intersection of the town, and it is a fairly small town, about 12,000 or so. Guess I asked because I wandered by, hot dog food truck was outside, thought a hot dog and a beer sounded good, but my truck was a few blocks away and did not feel like going back, disarming and returning. Maybe better planning on my part in the future. |
|
Quoted:
Thanks for the comments guys. The server was outside and folks were having a beer on the tables outside. Server was serving them, brewery is right on the main intersection of the town, and it is a fairly small town, about 12,000 or so. Guess I asked because I wandered by, hot dog food truck was outside, thought a hot dog and a beer sounded good, but my truck was a few blocks away and did not feel like going back, disarming and returning. Maybe better planning on my part in the future. I'd think TABC wouldn't look kindly on a bar serving people outside on a public sidewalk. With that said, if you're walking down a sidewalk and don't stop, I doubt you'd be convicted. I'm very skeptical with recent antics of TABC having vendors place 51% signs in places that clearly don't derive over 50% revenue from alcohol sales. |
|
Quoted:
I'd think TABC wouldn't look kindly on a bar serving people outside on a public sidewalk. With that said, if you're walking down a sidewalk and don't stop, I doubt you'd be convicted. I'm very skeptical with recent antics of TABC having vendors place 51% signs in places that clearly don't derive over 50% revenue from alcohol sales. Quoted:
Quoted:
Thanks for the comments guys. The server was outside and folks were having a beer on the tables outside. Server was serving them, brewery is right on the main intersection of the town, and it is a fairly small town, about 12,000 or so. Guess I asked because I wandered by, hot dog food truck was outside, thought a hot dog and a beer sounded good, but my truck was a few blocks away and did not feel like going back, disarming and returning. Maybe better planning on my part in the future. I'd think TABC wouldn't look kindly on a bar serving people outside on a public sidewalk. With that said, if you're walking down a sidewalk and don't stop, I doubt you'd be convicted. I'm very skeptical with recent antics of TABC having vendors place 51% signs in places that clearly don't derive over 50% revenue from alcohol sales. source of allegation for "antics" |
|
Quoted:
Penal code section 46.035 states that a license holder commits an offense if he carries on the premises of a 51% location. 46.035 defines premise as a building or a portion of a building. The definition specifically excludes sidewalks. So if the bar has an outdoor seating area that is leased by the bar, would that not be considered as "on premises"? It seems by definition it would not, but that seems strange. |
|
Quoted:
source of allegation for "antics" Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thanks for the comments guys. The server was outside and folks were having a beer on the tables outside. Server was serving them, brewery is right on the main intersection of the town, and it is a fairly small town, about 12,000 or so. Guess I asked because I wandered by, hot dog food truck was outside, thought a hot dog and a beer sounded good, but my truck was a few blocks away and did not feel like going back, disarming and returning. Maybe better planning on my part in the future. I'd think TABC wouldn't look kindly on a bar serving people outside on a public sidewalk. With that said, if you're walking down a sidewalk and don't stop, I doubt you'd be convicted. I'm very skeptical with recent antics of TABC having vendors place 51% signs in places that clearly don't derive over 50% revenue from alcohol sales. source of allegation for "antics" Posting 51% signage at Gexa Energy venue for example. Others have posted about other fairs & small businesses being posted. ETA - also posted at the entrances of Verizon in Grand Prairie for the couple of small bars inside. These were not posted in the bar area but at the general entrance and I can promise you the venue received substantially more revenue from the events. |
|
Quoted:
Thanks for the comments guys. The server was outside and folks were having a beer on the tables outside. Server was serving them, brewery is right on the main intersection of the town, and it is a fairly small town, about 12,000 or so. Guess I asked because I wandered by, hot dog food truck was outside, thought a hot dog and a beer sounded good, but my truck was a few blocks away and did not feel like going back, disarming and returning. Maybe better planning on my part in the future. The question I have would be an issue with TABC of serving alcohol for consumption outside of their business since the tables are on a public sidewalk. |
|
Quoted:
Posting 51% signage at Gexa Energy venue for example. Others have posted about other fairs & small businesses being posted. ETA - also posted at the entrances of Verizon in Grand Prairie for the couple of small bars inside. These were not posted in the bar area but at the general entrance and I can promise you the venue received substantially more revenue from the events. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thanks for the comments guys. The server was outside and folks were having a beer on the tables outside. Server was serving them, brewery is right on the main intersection of the town, and it is a fairly small town, about 12,000 or so. Guess I asked because I wandered by, hot dog food truck was outside, thought a hot dog and a beer sounded good, but my truck was a few blocks away and did not feel like going back, disarming and returning. Maybe better planning on my part in the future. I'd think TABC wouldn't look kindly on a bar serving people outside on a public sidewalk. With that said, if you're walking down a sidewalk and don't stop, I doubt you'd be convicted. I'm very skeptical with recent antics of TABC having vendors place 51% signs in places that clearly don't derive over 50% revenue from alcohol sales. source of allegation for "antics" Posting 51% signage at Gexa Energy venue for example. Others have posted about other fairs & small businesses being posted. ETA - also posted at the entrances of Verizon in Grand Prairie for the couple of small bars inside. These were not posted in the bar area but at the general entrance and I can promise you the venue received substantially more revenue from the events. Verizon theater is properly posted. Have you read the TABC code for the requirments of posting signage? Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? I am posting from the phone, but when I get back to the laptop I will post more... |
|
Quoted:
nope Quoted:
Quoted:
Isn't it an offense to consume alcohol while carrying? nope http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.46.htm A license holder commits an offense if, while intoxicated, the license holder carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed or carried in a shoulder or belt holster. I don't really know what intoxicated means under they eyes of the law. Easy answer is just don't be drunk/wasted. But then again, I would imagine that it's up to an officer to determine if you're intoxicated. |
| I don't know how those side walk café or bar things exist. It is a public sidewalk. It is not part of the building you pay rent on. I am surprised they can serve alcohol, pie, fritters, or eggs out there. It blocks a public sidewalk. GTFO the sidewalk. I am not a fan of outdoor dining on street front establishments. Covered patio at Joe's Crab Shack or something similar is OK. I will still eat inside. |
|
Quoted: Verizon theater is properly posted. Have you read the TABC code for the requirments of posting signage? Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? I am posting from the phone, but when I get back to the laptop I will post more... Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Thanks for the comments guys. The server was outside and folks were having a beer on the tables outside. Server was serving them, brewery is right on the main intersection of the town, and it is a fairly small town, about 12,000 or so. Guess I asked because I wandered by, hot dog food truck was outside, thought a hot dog and a beer sounded good, but my truck was a few blocks away and did not feel like going back, disarming and returning. Maybe better planning on my part in the future. I'd think TABC wouldn't look kindly on a bar serving people outside on a public sidewalk. With that said, if you're walking down a sidewalk and don't stop, I doubt you'd be convicted. I'm very skeptical with recent antics of TABC having vendors place 51% signs in places that clearly don't derive over 50% revenue from alcohol sales. source of allegation for "antics" Posting 51% signage at Gexa Energy venue for example. Others have posted about other fairs & small businesses being posted. ETA - also posted at the entrances of Verizon in Grand Prairie for the couple of small bars inside. These were not posted in the bar area but at the general entrance and I can promise you the venue received substantially more revenue from the events. Verizon theater is properly posted. Have you read the TABC code for the requirments of posting signage? Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? I am posting from the phone, but when I get back to the laptop I will post more... So then in this case, despite the signage, he can carry since the sidewalk is outdoors, right? |
|
Quoted:
Verizon theater is properly posted. Have you read the TABC code for the requirments of posting signage? Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? I am posting from the phone, but when I get back to the laptop I will post more... Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thanks for the comments guys. The server was outside and folks were having a beer on the tables outside. Server was serving them, brewery is right on the main intersection of the town, and it is a fairly small town, about 12,000 or so. Guess I asked because I wandered by, hot dog food truck was outside, thought a hot dog and a beer sounded good, but my truck was a few blocks away and did not feel like going back, disarming and returning. Maybe better planning on my part in the future. I'd think TABC wouldn't look kindly on a bar serving people outside on a public sidewalk. With that said, if you're walking down a sidewalk and don't stop, I doubt you'd be convicted. I'm very skeptical with recent antics of TABC having vendors place 51% signs in places that clearly don't derive over 50% revenue from alcohol sales. source of allegation for "antics" Posting 51% signage at Gexa Energy venue for example. Others have posted about other fairs & small businesses being posted. ETA - also posted at the entrances of Verizon in Grand Prairie for the couple of small bars inside. These were not posted in the bar area but at the general entrance and I can promise you the venue received substantially more revenue from the events. Verizon theater is properly posted. Have you read the TABC code for the requirments of posting signage? Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? I am posting from the phone, but when I get back to the laptop I will post more... The signs were paper on the entrance doors into the venue. This was NEVER THE CASE until recently. Please explain how this is valid since people go to the venue for a concert/meeting and buying booze is secondary. Bars, on the other hand, are primarily in the business of selling alcohol (well, at least the successful ones). Are you trying to take the position that the venue & concert organizers are separate business operations, thus the venue's only income is counter sales? Personally, I think that is what the TABC's new opinion is to counter 30.07. I find the timing of these new postings suspect. I was at a corporate event and I guarantee the two bars that were open managed to pull in substantially less (I'm guessing less than $1,000) than the fees charged to rent the facility for the evening. The signs were hastily taped to the entrances so I highly doubt this was properly posted. Sorry, it didn't pass the smell test. |
|
Quoted:
The signs were paper on the entrance doors into the venue. This was NEVER THE CASE until recently. Please explain how this is valid since people go to the venue for a concert/meeting and buying booze is secondary. Bars, on the other hand, are primarily in the business of selling alcohol (well, at least the successful ones). Are you trying to take the position that the venue & concert organizers are separate business operations, thus the venue's only income is counter sales? Personally, I think that is what the TABC's new opinion is to counter 30.07. I find the timing of these new postings suspect. I was at a corporate event and I guarantee the two bars that were open managed to pull in substantially less (I'm guessing less than $1,000) than the fees charged to rent the facility for the evening. The signs were hastily taped to the entrances so I highly doubt this was properly posted. Sorry, it didn't pass the smell test. There is a separate entity that owns the TABC licensees. You can purchase and carry your drink throughout the venue. The entire venue is under the TABC licensee; therefore, over 51% of the licensee's sales are from alcohol for on premise consumption. The entire place is off limits. |
|
Quoted:
There is a separate entity that owns the TABC licensees. You can purchase and carry your drink throughout the venue. The entire venue is under the TABC licensee; therefore, over 51% of the licensee's sales are from alcohol for on premise consumption. The entire place is off limits. Quoted:
Quoted:
The signs were paper on the entrance doors into the venue. This was NEVER THE CASE until recently. Please explain how this is valid since people go to the venue for a concert/meeting and buying booze is secondary. Bars, on the other hand, are primarily in the business of selling alcohol (well, at least the successful ones). Are you trying to take the position that the venue & concert organizers are separate business operations, thus the venue's only income is counter sales? Personally, I think that is what the TABC's new opinion is to counter 30.07. I find the timing of these new postings suspect. I was at a corporate event and I guarantee the two bars that were open managed to pull in substantially less (I'm guessing less than $1,000) than the fees charged to rent the facility for the evening. The signs were hastily taped to the entrances so I highly doubt this was properly posted. Sorry, it didn't pass the smell test. There is a separate entity that owns the TABC licensees. You can purchase and carry your drink throughout the venue. The entire venue is under the TABC licensee; therefore, over 51% of the licensee's sales are from alcohol for on premise consumption. The entire place is off limits. I can walk around the State Fair with all the different beer vendors but then walk outside and across the parking lot to watch a concert at GEXA and then I'm a criminal because they also sell beer there. Let me let that sink in for a minute... I feel like Mork calling Orson and trying to explain this nonsense. |
|
Once again better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
I don't carry all the time but when I do I have given up on dodging signs and doorways. If I need to piss and have to walk past a sign to piss fuck it I am foing. I just remember back to when you carried everywhere was illegal and smile a little. In other words if you think it is important enough to carry a gun then carry the damn gun otherwise leave it in the truck to start off with. |
|
Quoted:
Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? Would you mind explaining more about this comment? This is the first I've ever heard someone say this. I'm going to go back and re-read again how "premise" is defined. |
|
Quoted:
Would you mind explaining more about this comment? This is the first I've ever heard someone say this. I'm going to go back and re-read again how "premise" is defined. Quoted:
Quoted:
Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? Would you mind explaining more about this comment? This is the first I've ever heard someone say this. I'm going to go back and re-read again how "premise" is defined. 46.035 of the penal code. Premises means a building or a portion of a building. It does not include public or private driveways, parking lots, garages,,sidewalks, walkways etc. |
|
Quoted:
46.035 of the penal code. Premises means a building or a portion of a building. It does not include public or private driveways, parking lots, garages,,sidewalks, walkways etc. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? Would you mind explaining more about this comment? This is the first I've ever heard someone say this. I'm going to go back and re-read again how "premise" is defined. 46.035 of the penal code. Premises means a building or a portion of a building. It does not include public or private driveways, parking lots, garages,,sidewalks, walkways etc. I just found the same definition, however I've always (and maybe wrongly) considered a concrete or even dirt patio with tables or benches as part of "the building". I take it you disagree? edited to add: I'm not referring to anything that may be considered a parking lot or public space/sidewalk. |
|
Intoxication and the LTC holder is potentially very tricky. Penal Code §49.01 Intoxication includes not having the use of normal mental or physical faculties by introduction of alcohol, a substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances or other substance in the body; or having an alcohol concentration of .08 or more. Applying to the license holder §46.035(d) A license holder commits an offense if, while intoxicated, the license holder carries a handgun [under relevant code] regardless of whether the handgun is concealed or carried in a shoulder or belt holster. Regulatory Services Division wants LTC instructors to emphasize that Intoxication is not limited to a specific blood alcohol content. So, what's the tricky part? The judgement call of the investigating peace officer and the very specific wording of 49.01, "introduction of alcohol (and/or the other stuff), OR having a BAC of .08 or more." IANAL - but, I don't see this as a primary charge, but as an add-on charge if you did something stupid, were carrying, and had been drinking. |
|
Quoted:
I just found the same definition, however I've always (and maybe wrongly) considered a concrete or even dirt patio with tables or benches as part of "the building". I take it you disagree? edited to add: I'm not referring to anything that may be considered a parking lot or public space/sidewalk. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? Would you mind explaining more about this comment? This is the first I've ever heard someone say this. I'm going to go back and re-read again how "premise" is defined. 46.035 of the penal code. Premises means a building or a portion of a building. It does not include public or private driveways, parking lots, garages,,sidewalks, walkways etc. I just found the same definition, however I've always (and maybe wrongly) considered a concrete or even dirt patio with tables or benches as part of "the building". I take it you disagree? edited to add: I'm not referring to anything that may be considered a parking lot or public space/sidewalk. I would think that a designated dining area, i.e. not open to the public or part of a parking lot/sidewalk, could be considered a portion of a building, especially if there is a fence or wall separating if from the public. A sidewalk is specifically exempted so the OP would have been legal to stop and order a beer as long as he didn't cross the threshold of the building. |
|
I'm just pissed when I want into a place that looks like a restaurant, you walk in and wait to be seated by the hostess and around the corner, 51% sign.
I want it on the front door before I walk in. Plus if it's technically a bar, I'm not sure I want to eat there. It gets kind of hit and miss. The food sucked at the last "bar" I ate at. |
|
Quoted:
I would think that a designated dining area, i.e. not open to the public or part of a parking lot/sidewalk, could be considered a portion of a building, especially if there is a fence or wall separating if from the public. A sidewalk is specifically exempted so the OP would have been legal to stop and order a beer as long as he didn't cross the threshold of the building. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also, are you aware that despite signage, you may lawfully carry outdoors at 51% posted locations? Would you mind explaining more about this comment? This is the first I've ever heard someone say this. I'm going to go back and re-read again how "premise" is defined. 46.035 of the penal code. Premises means a building or a portion of a building. It does not include public or private driveways, parking lots, garages,,sidewalks, walkways etc. I just found the same definition, however I've always (and maybe wrongly) considered a concrete or even dirt patio with tables or benches as part of "the building". I take it you disagree? edited to add: I'm not referring to anything that may be considered a parking lot or public space/sidewalk. I would think that a designated dining area, i.e. not open to the public or part of a parking lot/sidewalk, could be considered a portion of a building, especially if there is a fence or wall separating if from the public. A sidewalk is specifically exempted so the OP would have been legal to stop and order a beer as long as he didn't cross the threshold of the building. That's always the way I've taken it as well. But when txinvestigator says something that doesn't seem to follow that thought, I figured I'd ask for more clarification to what he meant..... |
|
Quoted:
I'm just pissed when I want into a place that looks like a restaurant, you walk in and wait to be seated by the hostess and around the corner, 51% sign. I want it on the front door before I walk in. Plus if it's technically a bar, I'm not sure I want to eat there. It gets kind of hit and miss. The food sucked at the last "bar" I ate at. I agree. Fortunately there's a web site you can check before you go: https://www.tabc.state.tx.us/PublicInquiry/Status.aspx |
|
Quoted:
I'm just pissed when I want into a place that looks like a restaurant, you walk in and wait to be seated by the hostess and around the corner, 51% sign. I want it on the front door before I walk in. Plus if it's technically a bar, I'm not sure I want to eat there. It gets kind of hit and miss. The food sucked at the last "bar" I ate at. This 100% the 51% needs to be before you walk in the door, not behind the bar with all the other crap decorating the wall. I've had some great bar food, but I do want to know it's a BAR before going in. |
|
Quoted:
That's always the way I've taken it as well. But when txinvestigator says something that doesn't seem to follow that thought, I figured I'd ask for more clarification to what he meant..... My question - 1) Can a bar legally serve a customer alcohol off premises, on a public walkway? 2) If on public walkway, is customer in violation of local open container rules? I'd think someone would be afoul of the rules as quoted. To be safe, it would be best to never OC when drinking - too many issues, especially since it's not a guarantee that LE knows the laws they're enforcing. |
|
Quoted:
My question - 1) Can a bar legally serve a customer alcohol off premises, on a public walkway? 2) If on public walkway, is customer in violation of local open container rules? I'd think someone would be afoul of the rules as quoted. To be safe, it would be best to never OC when drinking - too many issues, especially since it's not a guarantee that LE knows the laws they're enforcing. Quoted:
Quoted:
That's always the way I've taken it as well. But when txinvestigator says something that doesn't seem to follow that thought, I figured I'd ask for more clarification to what he meant..... My question - 1) Can a bar legally serve a customer alcohol off premises, on a public walkway? 2) If on public walkway, is customer in violation of local open container rules? I'd think someone would be afoul of the rules as quoted. To be safe, it would be best to never OC when drinking - too many issues, especially since it's not a guarantee that LE knows the laws they're enforcing. Your first question pertains to TABC rules, not something I'm concerned with as a customer. In the second part, if we make those kind of broad assumptions about LE and there being "too many issues" then we'd never leave the house..... |
|
Quoted:
Your first question pertains to TABC rules, not something I'm concerned with as a customer. In the second part, if we make those kind of broad assumptions about LE and there being "too many issues" then we'd never leave the house..... Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That's always the way I've taken it as well. But when txinvestigator says something that doesn't seem to follow that thought, I figured I'd ask for more clarification to what he meant..... My question - 1) Can a bar legally serve a customer alcohol off premises, on a public walkway? 2) If on public walkway, is customer in violation of local open container rules? I'd think someone would be afoul of the rules as quoted. To be safe, it would be best to never OC when drinking - too many issues, especially since it's not a guarantee that LE knows the laws they're enforcing. Your first question pertains to TABC rules, not something I'm concerned with as a customer. In the second part, if we make those kind of broad assumptions about LE and there being "too many issues" then we'd never leave the house..... My bad, feel free to open carry to a bar and enjoy potential debate with the bar owners/authorities. |
|
Quoted:
My question - 1) Can a bar legally serve a customer alcohol off premises, on a public walkway? 2) If on public walkway, is customer in violation of local open container rules? I'd think someone would be afoul of the rules as quoted. To be safe, it would be best to never OC when drinking - too many issues, especially since it's not a guarantee that LE knows the laws they're enforcing. Quoted:
Quoted:
That's always the way I've taken it as well. But when txinvestigator says something that doesn't seem to follow that thought, I figured I'd ask for more clarification to what he meant..... My question - 1) Can a bar legally serve a customer alcohol off premises, on a public walkway? 2) If on public walkway, is customer in violation of local open container rules? I'd think someone would be afoul of the rules as quoted. To be safe, it would be best to never OC when drinking - too many issues, especially since it's not a guarantee that LE knows the laws they're enforcing. 1) If the area is fenced in to any degree it would be considered part of the premise. 2) If the area is not fenced in on the sidewalk there is usually (and mayber legally there should be) a sign that says no public consumption of alcohol. 3) If the area is not fenced in on the sidewalk in a historical district where OC is allowed (think Georgetown or Fredericksburg), you would not run afoul of either 1 or 2 and, as such, seems like it would be perfectly legal. For #3, I've ordered from what I would definitely consider public sidewalk, but may have had to go inside at other places, so I can't say definitively (and whether it's technically legal for them to do is another story). But definitely, in Georgetown you could sit down at a sidewalk table and your wife or friend could bring alcohol out to the table if the place was posted 51% and they would bring you your food. |
|
Quoted:
1) If the area is fenced in to any degree it would be considered part of the premise. 2) If the area is not fenced in on the sidewalk there is usually (and mayber legally there should be) a sign that says no public consumption of alcohol. 3) If the area is not fenced in on the sidewalk in a historical district where OC is allowed (think Georgetown or Fredericksburg), you would not run afoul of either 1 or 2 and, as such, seems like it would be perfectly legal. For #3, I've ordered from what I would definitely consider public sidewalk, but may have had to go inside at other places, so I can't say definitively (and whether it's technically legal for them to do is another story). But definitely, in Georgetown you could sit down at a sidewalk table and your wife or friend could bring alcohol out to the table if the place was posted 51% and they would bring you your food. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That's always the way I've taken it as well. But when txinvestigator says something that doesn't seem to follow that thought, I figured I'd ask for more clarification to what he meant..... My question - 1) Can a bar legally serve a customer alcohol off premises, on a public walkway? 2) If on public walkway, is customer in violation of local open container rules? I'd think someone would be afoul of the rules as quoted. To be safe, it would be best to never OC when drinking - too many issues, especially since it's not a guarantee that LE knows the laws they're enforcing. 1) If the area is fenced in to any degree it would be considered part of the premise. 2) If the area is not fenced in on the sidewalk there is usually (and mayber legally there should be) a sign that says no public consumption of alcohol. 3) If the area is not fenced in on the sidewalk in a historical district where OC is allowed (think Georgetown or Fredericksburg), you would not run afoul of either 1 or 2 and, as such, seems like it would be perfectly legal. For #3, I've ordered from what I would definitely consider public sidewalk, but may have had to go inside at other places, so I can't say definitively (and whether it's technically legal for them to do is another story). But definitely, in Georgetown you could sit down at a sidewalk table and your wife or friend could bring alcohol out to the table if the place was posted 51% and they would bring you your food. They - as in wife or server? |
|
Quoted:
They - as in wife or server? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That's always the way I've taken it as well. But when txinvestigator says something that doesn't seem to follow that thought, I figured I'd ask for more clarification to what he meant..... My question - 1) Can a bar legally serve a customer alcohol off premises, on a public walkway? 2) If on public walkway, is customer in violation of local open container rules? I'd think someone would be afoul of the rules as quoted. To be safe, it would be best to never OC when drinking - too many issues, especially since it's not a guarantee that LE knows the laws they're enforcing. 1) If the area is fenced in to any degree it would be considered part of the premise. 2) If the area is not fenced in on the sidewalk there is usually (and mayber legally there should be) a sign that says no public consumption of alcohol. 3) If the area is not fenced in on the sidewalk in a historical district where OC is allowed (think Georgetown or Fredericksburg), you would not run afoul of either 1 or 2 and, as such, seems like it would be perfectly legal. For #3, I've ordered from what I would definitely consider public sidewalk, but may have had to go inside at other places, so I can't say definitively (and whether it's technically legal for them to do is another story). But definitely, in Georgetown you could sit down at a sidewalk table and your wife or friend could bring alcohol out to the table if the place was posted 51% and they would bring you your food. They - as in wife or server? Server. At the place that's sidewalk seating, without question, I can't recall whether you have to order drinks inside. They'll definitely check on you and do food though, and you can for sure bring drinks outside... since there's no restriction on OC. The place with borderline sidewalk seating will bring you both for sure, and they've given me a beer while waiting outside on what is definitely sidewalk. This is in a historical district so the applicability elsewhere is pretty nonexistent. |
| The other thing is to try and verify that the 51% sign is valid. I've been in breweries in Austin with the blue sign and there is one in Austin with the red sign. The law changed recently to allow businesses with a brewery/brewpub license to sell by the glass instead of requiring purchase of a tasting tour, but they don't hold a wine & beer license which is what is normally subject to 51% signage. |
|
Quoted:
I agree. Fortunately there's a web site you can check before you go: https://www.tabc.state.tx.us/PublicInquiry/Status.aspx Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm just pissed when I want into a place that looks like a restaurant, you walk in and wait to be seated by the hostess and around the corner, 51% sign. I want it on the front door before I walk in. Plus if it's technically a bar, I'm not sure I want to eat there. It gets kind of hit and miss. The food sucked at the last "bar" I ate at. I agree. Fortunately there's a web site you can check before you go: https://www.tabc.state.tx.us/PublicInquiry/Status.aspx Even easier, there's an APP for that: http://www.tabc.state.tx.us/mobile/index.asp |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm just pissed when I want into a place that looks like a restaurant, you walk in and wait to be seated by the hostess and around the corner, 51% sign. I want it on the front door before I walk in. Plus if it's technically a bar, I'm not sure I want to eat there. It gets kind of hit and miss. The food sucked at the last "bar" I ate at. I agree. Fortunately there's a web site you can check before you go: https://www.tabc.state.tx.us/PublicInquiry/Status.aspx Even easier, there's an APP for that: http://www.tabc.state.tx.us/mobile/index.asp Version 3.0.2 can access:
Identity find accounts on the device Contacts find accounts on the device Location precise location (GPS and network-based) approximate location (network-based) Phone read phone status and identity Photos/Media/Files modify or delete the contents of your USB storage read the contents of your USB storage Storage modify or delete the contents of your USB storage read the contents of your USB storage Device ID & call information read phone status and identity Other receive data from Internet prevent device from sleeping full network access view network connections read Google service configuration 
|
|
Quoted:
I don't know how those side walk café or bar things exist. It is a public sidewalk. It is not part of the building you pay rent on. I am surprised they can serve alcohol, pie, fritters, or eggs out there. It blocks a public sidewalk. GTFO the sidewalk. I am not a fan of outdoor dining on street front establishments. Covered patio at Joe's Crab Shack or something similar is OK. I will still eat inside. I do know that the T.A.B.C. maps a locations of service areas. Part of that map may include the Sidewalk..thinking said tables may be covered under 51%, 30.06, 30.07 if that red line encompasses That sidewalk. If not, bar is outside the law on beverage service. Texasinvestigator, clarity please? |
|
Quoted:
There is a separate entity that owns the TABC licensees. You can purchase and carry your drink throughout the venue. The entire venue is under the TABC licensee; therefore, over 51% of the licensee's sales are from alcohol for on premise consumption. The entire place is off limits. What you said doesn't make any sense. It the entity with the TABC license is separate from the venue how would the whole venue be 51%. They're either 2 entities or they're not. |
|
Quoted:
I do know that the T.A.B.C. maps a locations of service areas. Part of that map may include the Sidewalk..thinking said tables may be covered under 51%, 30.06, 30.07 if that red line encompasses That sidewalk. If not, bar is outside the law on beverage service. Texasinvestigator, clarity please? Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know how those side walk café or bar things exist. It is a public sidewalk. It is not part of the building you pay rent on. I am surprised they can serve alcohol, pie, fritters, or eggs out there. It blocks a public sidewalk. GTFO the sidewalk. I am not a fan of outdoor dining on street front establishments. Covered patio at Joe's Crab Shack or something similar is OK. I will still eat inside. I do know that the T.A.B.C. maps a locations of service areas. Part of that map may include the Sidewalk..thinking said tables may be covered under 51%, 30.06, 30.07 if that red line encompasses That sidewalk. If not, bar is outside the law on beverage service. Texasinvestigator, clarity please? There is a difference between "premises" as defined by the Penal Code and a "licensed premise" according to the TABC code. As you stated, TABC requires all applicants to have a "map" of their business location which will indicate which part(s) of the business are part of the license premise for TABC inspection/enforcement purposes. This can and often does include the parking lot and exterior portions of the building (whether this can legally include a public sidewalk is another issue.) This differs from premises as defined by the PC since it specifically excludes sidewalks as part of the definition for enforcement of 46.035. So it's possible the sidewalk is part of the licensed premise for TABC purposes but clearly is not included in the definition of premises in the Penal Code. It's also possible the bar is outside the law on alcoholic beverage service in the OP and TABC hasn't taken note of it or has chosen to let it slide. I don't know. |
|
I think we need to do away with this silly 51% stuff. If you aren't drunk or stoned then carry freely.
Mayhap we can make that happen in the next legislative session. That is a stepping stone to constitutional carry. And to be rid of the stupid -06 and -07 signs... requiring trespass be delivered individually, personally and verbally at the occurrence and not some blanket nonsense. |
|
Quoted: I think we need to do away with this silly 51% stuff. If you aren't drunk or stoned then carry freely. Mayhap we can make that happen in the next legislative session. That is a stepping stone to constitutional carry. And to be rid of the stupid -06 and -07 signs... requiring trespass be delivered individually, personally and verbally at the occurrence and not some blanket nonsense. If we're going to defend the 2A then we should also embrace private property rights. Besides, the signs make it easier to direct my dollars elsewhere. I imagine continuing to whittle down the list of prohibited places is on the 'to do' list for the next session. |
|
Quoted:
If we're going to defend the 2A then we should also embrace private property rights. Besides, the signs make it easier to direct my dollars elsewhere. I imagine continuing to whittle down the list of prohibited places is on the 'to do' list for the next session. Quoted:
Quoted:
I think we need to do away with this silly 51% stuff. If you aren't drunk or stoned then carry freely. Mayhap we can make that happen in the next legislative session. That is a stepping stone to constitutional carry. And to be rid of the stupid -06 and -07 signs... requiring trespass be delivered individually, personally and verbally at the occurrence and not some blanket nonsense. If we're going to defend the 2A then we should also embrace private property rights. Besides, the signs make it easier to direct my dollars elsewhere. I imagine continuing to whittle down the list of prohibited places is on the 'to do' list for the next session. I agree. Property rights are just as important as the 2nd Amendment. Public buildings on the other hand are different and, I think, that there is a lot of room for improvement in that regard. |
|
Quoted:
If we're going to defend the 2A then we should also embrace private property rights. Besides, the signs make it easier to direct my dollars elsewhere. I imagine continuing to whittle down the list of prohibited places is on the 'to do' list for the next session. Quoted:
Quoted:
I think we need to do away with this silly 51% stuff. If you aren't drunk or stoned then carry freely. Mayhap we can make that happen in the next legislative session. That is a stepping stone to constitutional carry. And to be rid of the stupid -06 and -07 signs... requiring trespass be delivered individually, personally and verbally at the occurrence and not some blanket nonsense. If we're going to defend the 2A then we should also embrace private property rights. Besides, the signs make it easier to direct my dollars elsewhere. I imagine continuing to whittle down the list of prohibited places is on the 'to do' list for the next session. 30.06 and 30.07 signage having the effect of law merely by crossing them is not necessary to protect property rights. Property owners would still be free to post whatever signs they wanted. They would just have to go through the normal trespass procedures like for anything else. Say for example I don't want to permit someone from carrying a concealed dildo on my property. I don't have a sign I can post for that and it isn't the freaking end of the world. If someone starts causing a problem with a dildo on my property I can still ask them to leave and call the police if they refuse. I say lets get rid of the signs altogether. A number of other states who have enacted carry laws more recently than us (and a few before) do not have any equivalent to 30.06 or 30.07 and it isn't the end of the world for them. If we can't get rid of all of them at once then lets get rid of 51% and 30.06 and if there is, as I suspect... basically no problems, then we can complete it and get rid of 30.07 too. |
|
Quoted:
30.06 and 30.07 signage having the effect of law merely by crossing them is not necessary to protect property rights. Property owners would still be free to post whatever signs they wanted. They would just have to go through the normal trespass procedures like for anything else. Say for example I don't want to permit someone from carrying a concealed dildo on my property. I don't have a sign I can post for that and it isn't the freaking end of the world. If someone starts causing a problem with a dildo on my property I can still ask them to leave and call the police if they refuse. I say lets get rid of the signs altogether. A number of other states who have enacted carry laws more recently than us (and a few before) do not have any equivalent to 30.06 or 30.07 and it isn't the end of the world for them. If we can't get rid of all of them at once then lets get rid of 51% and 30.06 and if there is, as I suspect... basically no problems, then we can complete it and get rid of 30.07 too. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think we need to do away with this silly 51% stuff. If you aren't drunk or stoned then carry freely. Mayhap we can make that happen in the next legislative session. That is a stepping stone to constitutional carry. And to be rid of the stupid -06 and -07 signs... requiring trespass be delivered individually, personally and verbally at the occurrence and not some blanket nonsense. If we're going to defend the 2A then we should also embrace private property rights. Besides, the signs make it easier to direct my dollars elsewhere. I imagine continuing to whittle down the list of prohibited places is on the 'to do' list for the next session. 30.06 and 30.07 signage having the effect of law merely by crossing them is not necessary to protect property rights. Property owners would still be free to post whatever signs they wanted. They would just have to go through the normal trespass procedures like for anything else. Say for example I don't want to permit someone from carrying a concealed dildo on my property. I don't have a sign I can post for that and it isn't the freaking end of the world. If someone starts causing a problem with a dildo on my property I can still ask them to leave and call the police if they refuse. I say lets get rid of the signs altogether. A number of other states who have enacted carry laws more recently than us (and a few before) do not have any equivalent to 30.06 or 30.07 and it isn't the end of the world for them. If we can't get rid of all of them at once then lets get rid of 51% and 30.06 and if there is, as I suspect... basically no problems, then we can complete it and get rid of 30.07 too. But how would getting rid of the 30.06/30.07 signs change anything if the property owners could simply post a sign declaring any gun owners entering the business are trespassing? Under 30.05 any sign declaring gun owners as trespassers would constitute the act of trespassing as soon as the CC'er crossed the threshold. Good luck on getting ride of the 51% signs, 30.06/07 will go before that does. There are too many people in this state that are hung up over alcohol. For example, why are there restrictions on when you can buy alcoholic beverages? What purpose does it serve? Why can you sell beer and wine at Kroger but not whiskey? Most laws dealing with alcohol sales are nonsensical. 51% ain't going anywhere. |
|
Quoted: I agree. Property rights are just as important as the 2nd Amendment. Public buildings on the other hand are different and, I think, that there is a lot of room for improvement in that regard. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think we need to do away with this silly 51% stuff. If you aren't drunk or stoned then carry freely. Mayhap we can make that happen in the next legislative session. That is a stepping stone to constitutional carry. And to be rid of the stupid -06 and -07 signs... requiring trespass be delivered individually, personally and verbally at the occurrence and not some blanket nonsense. If we're going to defend the 2A then we should also embrace private property rights. Besides, the signs make it easier to direct my dollars elsewhere. I imagine continuing to whittle down the list of prohibited places is on the 'to do' list for the next session. I agree. Property rights are just as important as the 2nd Amendment. Public buildings on the other hand are different and, I think, that there is a lot of room for improvement in that regard. We're in agreement there. Hopefully, we won't see them waste time on trying to pass something in regards to federal property, like last time. Not sure what they thought they were going to accomplish there. With open carry done. There should be plenty of time, and hopefully support, for some meaningful tweaks this next time around. Work on prohibited places (I think w/ LTC you should be able to carry anywhere a peace officer can). I'd like to see the license cost come down. Make it $70 (what seniors pay now), knock seniors down to $45, and keep vets at $25 and zero for active duty. What else? |