TexasCHLforum.com

I'm hoping to get some clarity on when 51% signs are binding...

Government Code 46.035 (b)(1) prohibits carry at 51% locations.

Government Code 46.035(k) provides: "It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (b)(1) that the actor was not given effective notice under Section 411.204, Government Code."

Government Code Section 411.204 provides: "The sign required under Subsections (a) and (b) must give notice in both English and Spanish that it is unlawful for a person licensed under this subchapter to carry a handgun on the premises. The sign must appear in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height and must include on its face the number '51' printed in solid red at least five inches in height. The sign shall be displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public."

Many 51% locations I've seen only have English signs posted. Does this mean that someone who carries in such a location would have a defense to prosecution?

Not unless you can prove you don't speak English.

Seriously though, if there is a big red 51% sign posted, it would behoove you not to be caught carrying. I have entered an establishment, and not seen any signs, until I was well inside the door, and they were posted above the bar area, of the restaurant. I promptly left. I then checked the TABC website, and found out that their signs were incorrect. They should have been posted with Blue TABC signs. I put in a complaint with the TABC.

YMMV but I would not rely on a technicality, like sign language, to try and "get by" with anything. Being arrested, charged with UCW, and having my LTC revoked, on the "hope" that the judge or jury, would see things my way, is too large, of a risk. There are too many other establishments to get what I want. JMHO

^^ Exactly this.

Jusme wrote: ↑Mon Apr 01, 2019 10:06 am Not unless you can prove you don't speak English.

Seriously though, if there is a big red 51% sign posted, it would behoove you not to be caught carrying. I have entered an establishment, and not seen any signs, until I was well inside the door, and they were posted above the bar area, of the restaurant. I promptly left. I then checked the TABC website, and found out that their signs were incorrect. They should have been posted with Blue TABC signs. I put in a complaint with the TABC.

YMMV but I would not rely on a technicality, like sign language, to try and "get by" with anything. Being arrested, charged with UCW, and having my LTC revoked, on the "hope" that the judge or jury, would see things my way, is too large, of a risk. There are too many other establishments to get what I want. JMHO

Clarity: You correctly identified the sign, don’t carry there. Use the TABC app to alert the TABC about the improper signage.

And I can tell you from personal experience that TABC will act. I even got a call from an agent asking for more info on a report I registered with the app.

Jusme wrote: ↑Mon Apr 01, 2019 10:06 am Not unless you can prove you don't speak English.

Seriously though, if there is a big red 51% sign posted, it would behoove you not to be caught carrying. I have entered an establishment, and not seen any signs, until I was well inside the door, and they were posted above the bar area, of the restaurant. I promptly left. I then checked the TABC website, and found out that their signs were incorrect. They should have been posted with Blue TABC signs. I put in a complaint with the TABC.

YMMV but I would not rely on a technicality, like sign language, to try and "get by" with anything. Being arrested, charged with UCW, and having my LTC revoked, on the "hope" that the judge or jury, would see things my way, is too large, of a risk. There are too many other establishments to get what I want. JMHO

It's not a technicality. It's not meeting a clear and fairly objective standard for giving required notice that is a condition for a charge to apply.

jordanmills wrote: ↑Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:46 pm

Jusme wrote: ↑Mon Apr 01, 2019 10:06 am Not unless you can prove you don't speak English.

Seriously though, if there is a big red 51% sign posted, it would behoove you not to be caught carrying. I have entered an establishment, and not seen any signs, until I was well inside the door, and they were posted above the bar area, of the restaurant. I promptly left. I then checked the TABC website, and found out that their signs were incorrect. They should have been posted with Blue TABC signs. I put in a complaint with the TABC.

YMMV but I would not rely on a technicality, like sign language, to try and "get by" with anything. Being arrested, charged with UCW, and having my LTC revoked, on the "hope" that the judge or jury, would see things my way, is too large, of a risk. There are too many other establishments to get what I want. JMHO

It's not a technicality. It's not meeting a clear and fairly objective standard for giving required notice that is a condition for a charge to apply.

It's kind of like saying carrying with a LTC is a technicality because the 46.15 non-applicability has been ruled a Defense to Prosecution.

jordanmills wrote: ↑Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:46 pm

Jusme wrote: ↑Mon Apr 01, 2019 10:06 am Not unless you can prove you don't speak English.

Seriously though, if there is a big red 51% sign posted, it would behoove you not to be caught carrying. I have entered an establishment, and not seen any signs, until I was well inside the door, and they were posted above the bar area, of the restaurant. I promptly left. I then checked the TABC website, and found out that their signs were incorrect. They should have been posted with Blue TABC signs. I put in a complaint with the TABC.

YMMV but I would not rely on a technicality, like sign language, to try and "get by" with anything. Being arrested, charged with UCW, and having my LTC revoked, on the "hope" that the judge or jury, would see things my way, is too large, of a risk. There are too many other establishments to get what I want. JMHO

It's not a technicality. It's not meeting a clear and fairly objective standard for giving required notice that is a condition for a charge to apply.

Maybe it's not a "technicality" but, to me the risk is greater, than the " possible" reward. I don't possess, the funds necessary, to risk being arrested, jailed, for an indeterminate amount of time, while my family suffers, from my lack of income, while I await, my day in court, to show, my expertise, on the actual wording on the law.
There are alternatives, to getting, an establishment, to comply with the letter of the law, without, risking my freedom, reputation, and employment. JMHO