walmart asking for chl

[Texsquatch]

So those that don't like Walmart asking to see personal info on LTC would also not show DL when they buy alcohol?

I know I'll probably get flamed for saying that, but it is kinda the same thing.

I still get carded for beer, although it's becoming less frequent. However, I think some stores have a 100% rule and card everyone (or sometimes they're forced to by TABC) and I haven't screamed and cried about it.

[stingeragent]

I'm cool with showing the license to an employee if they ask. As mentioned above, its the same thing as being carded for beer or cigarettes. Now if a random stranger asks me, NOPE.

[The Badger531]

ME & the GF went to wally world the other day and HAD NO ONE NOT 1 STORE MANAGER APPROACH US WANTING TO SEE MY CHL WHILE I WAS OPENLY CARRYING MY BERSA 380 I HAD SOME NODS OF APPROVAL FROM A FEW CUSTOMERS AND I HAD A COUPLE OF PARENTS GRAB THEIR KIDS CLOSER TO THEM AND THAT WAS ABOUT IT REALLY

The Badger531

[Richbirdhunter]

I think Walmart asking for CHL is just an urban legend

[Oldgringo]

I think Walmart asking for CHL is just an urban legend

...and "much ado about nothing".

[mojo84]

I have been thinking a lot about this and went back and read the article. I find it it interesting how it has provided another topic for us bicker with one another about. Here are a couple observations for us all to consider.

1. The article was published on Bloomberg's website.

2. I think most if not all have overlooked a key part, in bold below, of the quote from Wal-Mart's management.

“We do try to ensure that people have a licensed firearm,” said Wal-Mart spokesman Brian Nick. “We are giving direction to our store employees to ask for a license as our management sees appropriate.”

I believe this is just another instance of the anti-gun crowd throwing something out there to mislead people and we end up getting all riled up and start bickering amongst ourselves publicly again. They know we will turn on one another at a drop of a hat and they use that to their advantage.

[pt145ss]

I OCed at Wal-Mart Saturday evening. No one said a word to me. I walked the whole store buying bread, coffee creamer, sugar, and etc. Never got a second look. I don't think anyone even noticed until I asked someone to open the ammo case to buy some 7.62x39 (for a new AR I picked up last week). Even then, no one said anything, no dirty looks... nothing.

[Papa_Tiger]

Walmart Tasks Workers with Verifying Licenses of gun-toting customers - Austin American Statesman

A regurgitation of the talking points from the Bloomberg article. Nothing new, but on the front page of today's Statesman. I didn't learn anything by reading the article, and it seems that they really didn't do any investigation to get their facts straight either. Journalism today is dead.

Mark Twain hit the nail on the head: “If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed.”

[JALLEN]

Mark Twain hit the nail on the head: “If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed.”

Not just about that, either.

"Man is the only animal that blushes, or needs to."

"If you make a dog prosperous, it will not bite you. This is the principal difference between dog and man."

- and much, much more.

[mojo84]

There is a quote from a TABC person in the Statesman article that substantiates Walmart's claim that they could face penalties.

I still think Walmart managers will ask to verify license status only on certain occassions as they believe it is warranted and necessary.

[Oldgringo]

I have been thinking a lot about this and went back and read the article. I find it it interesting how it has provided another topic for us bicker with one another about. Here are a couple observations for us all to consider.

1. The article was published on Bloomberg's website.

2. I think most if not all have overlooked a key part, in bold below, of the quote from Wal-Mart's management.

“We do try to ensure that people have a licensed firearm,” said Wal-Mart spokesman Brian Nick. “We are giving direction to our store employees to ask for a license as our management sees appropriate.”

I believe this is just another instance of the anti-gun crowd throwing something out there to mislead people and we end up getting all riled up and start bickering amongst ourselves publicly again. They know we will turn on one another at a drop of a hat and they use that to their advantage.

What was it that Pogo said about locating the enemy?

[oljames3]

... What was it that Pogo said about locating the enemy?

"We have met the enemy and he is us."
http://www.thisdayinquotes.com/2011/04/ ... is-us.html

[Oldgringo]

... What was it that Pogo said about locating the enemy?

"We have met the enemy and he is us."
http://www.thisdayinquotes.com/2011/04/ ... is-us.html

WINNER! Give the man a cigar, Bill. No, not that one, give him a fresh one, please.

[mojo84]

For those of you that think it is a copout, excuse or up to the TABC agent's attitude or mood, here is the response to my direct email inquiry to TABC. I hope you find this post edifying.

Hello Mojo84,
 
Under Sections 11.61(e) and 61.71(f) of the Alcoholic Beverage Code, TABC is required to begin permit/license cancellation proceedings if it is discovered an unlicensed handgun was brought onto the premises of a licensed/permitted business. This being the case, retailers should make arrangements to verify the License to Carry of anyone who possesses a handgun on their premises. Ultimately, how each business chooses to fulfil this requirement is up to them, but TABC is required by law to begin cancellation proceedings if a violation is found.

Notice it says they are required to begin permit/license cancellation proceedings if it is discovered and unlicensed handgun was brought into the premises.

It also says they do not care how one goes about such verification.

Here is my original email inquiry.

It is my understanding a licensee that has a permit to sell alcohol for off premise consumption can be held responsible for knowingly allowing someone to carry an unlicensed firearm into their premises. 
 
Now that open carry has passed, how will TABC respond if someone is openly carrying a firearm without a proper license in the premise of a licensee that sells alcohol for off premise consumption? Will the alcohol  licensee still be subjected to penalty as they were previously? Do they have an obligation to ensure the people that are carrying openly are properly licensed to carry? Does the new open carry law supersede the TABC rules regarding unlicensed carry? An example is Wal-Mart is asking some open carriers of handgun to show them their License to Carry a handgun. Is this action appropriate and necessary?
 
Your feedback at your earliest convenience would be greatly appreciated. 
 
Thank you,

I maintain, until the TABC rules are changed, the onus is on the retailer. It doesn't matter if mom and pop or other retailers understand this or not.

Based on this, it seems the TABC is providing an incentive for alcohol retailers to put up 30.07 and 30.06 signs.

[pt145ss]

For those of you that think it is a copout, excuse or up to the TABC agent's attitude or mood, here is the response to my direct email inquiry to TABC. I hope you find this post edifying.

Hello Mojo84,
 
Under Sections 11.61(e) and 61.71(f) of the Alcoholic Beverage Code, TABC is required to begin permit/license cancellation proceedings if it is discovered an unlicensed handgun was brought onto the premises of a licensed/permitted business. This being the case, retailers should make arrangements to verify the License to Carry of anyone who possesses a handgun on their premises. Ultimately, how each business chooses to fulfil this requirement is up to them, but TABC is required by law to begin cancellation proceedings if a violation is found.

Notice it says they are required to begin permit/license cancellation proceedings if it is discovered and unlicensed handgun was brought into the premises.

It also says they do not care how one goes about such verification.

Here is my original email inquiry.

It is my understanding a licensee that has a permit to sell alcohol for off premise consumption can be held responsible for knowingly allowing someone to carry an unlicensed firearm into their premises. 
 
Now that open carry has passed, how will TABC respond if someone is openly carrying a firearm without a proper license in the premise of a licensee that sells alcohol for off premise consumption? Will the alcohol  licensee still be subjected to penalty as they were previously? Do they have an obligation to ensure the people that are carrying openly are properly licensed to carry? Does the new open carry law supersede the TABC rules regarding unlicensed carry? An example is Wal-Mart is asking some open carriers of handgun to show them their License to Carry a handgun. Is this action appropriate and necessary?
 
Your feedback at your earliest convenience would be greatly appreciated. 
 
Thank you,

I maintain, until the TABC rules are changed, the onus is on the retailer. It doesn't matter if mom and pop or other retailers understand this or not.

Based on this, it seems the TABC is providing an incentive for alcohol retailers to put up 30.07 and 30.06 signs.

I'm curious as to what it means when the rule says "Knowingly Allowing." If a retailer checks for LTC and the OCer does not have one and the retailer allows the OCer to stay... Then I would agree that the retailer "Knowingly" Allowed and unlicensed handgun on the premises. On the other hand, if a retailer does not check an OCer for an LTC and the TABC somehow discovers that the OCer does not have an LTC... Did the retailer "Knowingly" allow an unlicensed handgun on the premises? Can the retailer make an argument for assuming that their patrons are law abiding citizens and thereby assume that OCers are carrying lawfully... which means licensed?