TexasCHLforum.com

locke_n_load wrote:Is TABC demanding Walmart do this? There are 1000s of stores that sell alcohol in the same manner as walmart, and I have not heard of them having this requirement.
If TABC is making this the issue, then the blue unlicensed signs and that force of law need to be legislated out. Who cares if you sell alcohol for off-premise consumption? If you say that hoodlums with guns may try to rob the place because they like alcohol, why don't places like jewelry stores get automatic protection too? I bet thieves like jewelry as much as alcohol.

I don't think TABC is requiring this at all, but having spoken to a few businesses over the years, I think the concern is this: If a licensee (TABC, not CHL) knowingly allows the unlicensed possession of weapons, they could be held liable and/or lose their liquor license. I think this is more of a practical concern for on-premise consumption licensees, BUT I can see where TABC licensees could perceive a risk.

A quick perusal indicates (to me, a non-lawyer) a potential gray area in the law: TABC code requires that they not knowingly allow unlicensed carry. Our CHL does allow us to carry. I think the INTENT of the TABC code is to keep their licensees from a "wink-wink-nudge-nudge" attitude, but as with anything left to "discretion" could become an issue. There's really not a precedent that I know of, especially since up to this point all licensed carry has been concealed, and thus "out of sight out of mind" -- in other words, it couldn't POSSIBLY rise to the level of "knowingly" for a TABC licensee.

Remember, we eat drink, live, and breathe this stuff, and discuss the nuances of law constantly. For a grocery store, Wal-Mart, restaurant owner, convenience store, or other proprietor, it's just ONE MORE HASSLE among all the other regulatory hassles of running a business...and being drawn deeper into the controversy by either side will frequently lead them to the easiest decision that makes the noise stop.

Also, keep in mind that when you're working with (or for) the Fortune-500 level corporations, often perception is a bigger issue than reality. The perception of being in the middle of a hot-topic issue that really doesn't affect you directly is something that PR departments at major corporations spend careers trying to avoid. Being a national-chain deep-pocket respondent in an obscure civil suit is something to avoid, and every decision comes down to a dollar-figure (sad reality, but true fact).

We talk about "beating the rqp but not beating the ride," but in a civil sense, as a perceived deep-pocket corporation, defending the ride sometimes costs far more than the actual "rap" and the public relations and goodwill losses (intangibles) can be unimaginable.

Business owners are getting caught in the middle of a fight they didn't start, can't finish, and that quite frankly isn't the top of their priority list. Sometimes there's a bigger picture than what we see at first blush.

I posted an almost identical response on a similar thread, so forgive me if I seem to be repeating myself.

First let me go on record by saying that my reaction to being asked for my LTC in any situation is influenced by whether someone "Demands" or "Requests" it.

Now, with that said, I think in the majority of cases the heartburn over these questions comes from being caught off-guard. Like so many things around a self-defense mindset, we need to have a plan for how to handle this situation. It may not survive "first contact," but at least at that point we're working from a point of reference instead of "flying by the seat of our pants."

If asked, do you plan to simply cover and move on? Do you plan to refuse to provide your LTC? Do you plan to just show it and move on? Know how you'd like to handle it, and then know how you plan to do that. Then do it. Deviation from the plan is fine, but you now have a "home base" to work from.

Remember that the person asking/confronting you may be as unsure as you about it--they may have been tagged with "go check that person out" and blindsided as well. Not a good position to start a conversation from.

And always work to move the discussion to an adult ego state, regardless of whether you intend to cooperate, or refuse to comply.

Remember the conflict resolution training we all get, and keep in mind that living in "condition yellow" means more than just spotting the bad guys before they spot you.