Majestic Theater San Antonio--Posted?

[Charlies.Contingency]

Liars figure.....figures lie. I'm about ready to kick all the transplants out of Tx....a lot of liberal panty waists takin over

While liars figure and figures lie, lying to the TABC about alcohol sales is not on any business' mindset if they wish to have a good future. I'm not worried about 51% signs personally. I have no desire to be around a bunch of people drinking and drunks.

[sugar land dave]

Why not take a high-road approach? Why do we not ask our politicians why a government owned building should be allowed to have alcohol served upon its premises? It seems to me that the govenment should not do anything which might help support public intoxication or potential alcoholism. Perhaps we could even get MADD to take up the torch in this endevour. If we could get some moms involved in helping our 2A rights instead of opposing them, it sounds like a potential for a win-win to me.

[cp30]

So looking their TABC permit status up through http://www.tabc.texas.gov/PublicInquiry/Status.aspx it shows it expired 9/2/2015. Does this mean it is invalid if posted?

It does mention ***PENDING RENEWAL***

Majestic license # MB418155

[sho4020039]

I just called the theater and asked specifically if they had any signs posted outside or at the bar prohibiting concealed carry. The person I spoke to said no but said as private management company she is verbally letting me know that weapons are not allowed. My question is, can they prohibit concealed carry when no signs are posted?

[ScottDLS]

I just called the theater and asked specifically if they had any signs posted outside or at the bar prohibiting concealed carry. The person I spoke to said no but said as private management company she is verbally letting me know that weapons are not allowed. My question is, can they prohibit concealed carry when no signs are posted?

Yes, but not for government owned property. So in general it is best to follow the former DoD policy of the Clinton Administration regarding homosexual conduct in the military... "Don't ask, don't tell"...

[Keith B]

I just called the theater and asked specifically if they had any signs posted outside or at the bar prohibiting concealed carry. The person I spoke to said no but said as private management company she is verbally letting me know that weapons are not allowed. My question is, can they prohibit concealed carry when no signs are posted?

Yes they can, and you have now been verbally given notice, so you can't carry there now.

[locke_n_load]

I just called the theater and asked specifically if they had any signs posted outside or at the bar prohibiting concealed carry. The person I spoke to said no but said as private management company she is verbally letting me know that weapons are not allowed. My question is, can they prohibit concealed carry when no signs are posted?

Yes they can, and you have now been verbally given notice, so you can't carry there now.

Keith, I thought the theater was on city property, so no 30.06 or verbal warning carried any weight, except in this instance, the address is 51%, so no carry anyway?

[Keith B]

Keith, I thought the theater was on city property, so no 30.06 or verbal warning carried any weight, except in this instance, the address is 51%, so no carry anyway?

Oh, didn't realize it was owned by the city. But as you stated if it's 51%, then off limits anyway.

[MeMelYup]

Keith, I thought the theater was on city property, so no 30.06 or verbal warning carried any weight, except in this instance, the address is 51%, so no carry anyway?

Oh, didn't realize it was owned by the city. But as you stated if it's 51%, then off limits anyway.

That is something Texans need to look into. You go to a firearms show and they have a vender there that sells alcohol. Does that make the entire show 51%?

Ft Worth Zoo, a vender sells alcohol there and uses the zoo address. Does that make the entire zoo 51%? They have a train ride, does that make them an amusement park? They teach groups of kids on school outings about the animals, does that make then an educational institution?

[Keith B]

That is something Texans need to look into. You go to a firearms show and they have a vender there that sells alcohol. Does that make the entire show 51%?

Only if the TABC shows the 'premises' as the whole location and the vendor makes more than 51% from sale of alcohol for on-premise consumption, then it could be 51%. They should have a sign if it is.

Ft Worth Zoo, a vender sells alcohol there and uses the zoo address. Does that make the entire zoo 51%? They have a train ride, does that make them an amusement park? They teach groups of kids on school outings about the animals, does that make then an educational institution?

For the 51%, it is the same as above. The Waco Zoo actually has that issue. The liquor license is held by the Cameron Park Zoological and Botanical Society and it is a RED license. The premises is the whole zoo. I called the TABC and they said they reviewed the license and it was valid for the sale percentage.

As for the amusement park, they would have to meet the other requirements to be an amusement park (size, days open, etc.) and then prove that the train was an amusement ride.

They are NOT an educaitonal institution as they are not a 'school'.

[MeMelYup]

That is something Texans need to look into. You go to a firearms show and they have a vender there that sells alcohol. Does that make the entire show 51%?

Only if the TABC shows the 'premises' as the whole location and the vendor makes more than 51% from sale of alcohol for on-premise consumption, then it could be 51%. They should have a sign if it is.

Ft Worth Zoo, a vender sells alcohol there and uses the zoo address. Does that make the entire zoo 51%? They have a train ride, does that make them an amusement park? They teach groups of kids on school outings about the animals, does that make then an educational institution?

For the 51%, it is the same as above. The Waco Zoo actually has that issue. The liquor license is held by the Cameron Park Zoological and Botanical Society and it is a RED license. The premises is the whole zoo. I called the TABC and they said they reviewed the license and it was valid for the sale percentage.

As for the amusement park, they would have to meet the other requirements to be an amusement park (size, days open, etc.) and then prove that the train was an amusement ride.

They are NOT an educaitonal institution as they are not a 'school'.

They are saying that the zoo makes over 51% of its money from alcohol? If so they must sell a lot of booze.

[Keith B]

They are saying that the zoo makes over 51% of its money from alcohol? If so they must sell a lot of booze.

No. They are saying that the Cameron Park Zoological and Botanical Society, who holds the liquor license, makes more than 51% of their revenue from the sale of alcohol at their functions. The revenue amount is based on the holder of the liquor license.

A couple of other examples are the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth. The vendor who holds the license makes more than 51% of their revenue from sale of alcohol for on-premise consumption. The TABC has the whole museum as the defined 'premises', so that makes the whole place off limits per TABC.

The same issue exists at a couple of bowling alley's where they have a lounge owned by someone else. That company only sells liquor, so they are off limits. Bass Performance Hall in Fort Worth is the same way.

That rule needs to be changed so these little 'shell' businesses can't make the whole place off-limits.

[denwego]

They are saying that the zoo makes over 51% of its money from alcohol? If so they must sell a lot of booze.

No. They are saying that the Cameron Park Zoological and Botanical Society, who holds the liquor license, makes more than 51% of their revenue from the sale of alcohol at their functions. The revenue amount is based on the holder of the liquor license.

A couple of other examples are the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth. The vendor who holds the license makes more than 51% of their revenue from sale of alcohol for on-premise consumption. The TABC has the whole museum as the defined 'premises', so that makes the whole place off limits per TABC.

The same issue exists at a couple of bowling alley's where they have a lounge owned by someone else. That company only sells liquor, so they are off limits. Bass Performance Hall in Fort Worth is the same way.

That rule needs to be changed so these little 'shell' businesses can't make the whole place off-limits.

What's even worse is that while it's easy to look up Red/Blue status on the TABC website, it's like pulling teeth to find out what property is licensed or permitted, since the maps and plans submitted with an application aren't readily retrievable at all, as far as I know. It might be obvious in the case of a bar, but get something like the Ren Faire or the Waco Zoo... that's a nightmare for compliance.

And the zoo makes me think of something I hadn't ever noticed before: let's say something like the Waco Zoo is licensed, actually encompasses the whole property, and is 51%. The Waco Zoo is more or less entirely outdoors, composed of footpaths and the like; §46.035 defines "premises" as "a building or a portion of a building", so... a genuinely Red location that's entirely outdoors should be technically OK to carry with a LTC, eh? Felony violations are a hell of a razor's edge, but that's the plain language as I read it...

[Keith B]

And the zoo makes me think of something I hadn't ever noticed before: let's say something like the Waco Zoo is licensed, actually encompasses the whole property, and is 51%. The Waco Zoo is more or less entirely outdoors, composed of footpaths and the like; §46.035 defines "premises" as "a building or a portion of a building", so... a genuinely Red location that's entirely outdoors should be technically OK to carry with a LTC, eh? Felony violations are a heck of a razor's edge, but that's the plain language as I read it...

Therein lies the rub. Per the definition of TABC, 'Licensed Premises are any premises covered by permit or license issued by the Commission', so is not the same as 46.035, it is whatever is defined by the TABC and the owner as the area where alcohol can be consumed on premise. For example, at a restaurant they may actually define the area on the sidewalk as part of their premises if they have a couple of outside tables where they serve food and alcohol. Those are usually surrounded by a short wall of barrier, but may not be. That area for a 51% location would be off-limits even though it was on a sidewalk if the TABC officer used the premises definition by TABC. They should use the definition in 46.035 which says ' "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.', but they may not, so it would take a lawyer and judge to get charges dismissed or find you not guilty due to where the offense took place.

[ScottDLS]

And the zoo makes me think of something I hadn't ever noticed before: let's say something like the Waco Zoo is licensed, actually encompasses the whole property, and is 51%. The Waco Zoo is more or less entirely outdoors, composed of footpaths and the like; §46.035 defines "premises" as "a building or a portion of a building", so... a genuinely Red location that's entirely outdoors should be technically OK to carry with a LTC, eh? Felony violations are a heck of a razor's edge, but that's the plain language as I read it...

Therein lies the rub. Per the definition of TABC, 'Licensed Premises are any premises covered by permit or license issued by the Commission', so is not the same as 46.035, it is whatever is defined by the TABC and the owner as the area where alcohol can be consumed on premise. For example, at a restaurant they may actually define the area on the sidewalk as part of their premises if they have a couple of outside tables where they serve food and alcohol. Those are usually surrounded by a short wall of barrier, but may not be. That area for a 51% location would be off-limits even though it was on a sidewalk if the TABC officer used the premises definition by TABC. They should use the definition in 46.035 which says ' "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.', but they may not, so it would take a lawyer and judge to get charges dismissed or find you not guilty due to where the offense took place.

I think this is a very important distinction. The crime you are going to be charged with is under section 46.035...and the section specifically defines premises to exclude sidewalks, walkways, etc. "Licensed" may be defined by the ABC code, but for the unlawful carry, "premises" is specifically defined by the 46.035 statute, and that should be how it's applied. The State Fair of Texas comes to mind, as there are large numbers of 51% booths there, and I'll bet they draw off all of Fair Park in the licenses, yet the state allows carry there...