More States Allowing Guns in Bars and Restaurants

[BrentWil]

I thought the GOP wanted empower business owners not create regulations them that forced them to serve Jesse James.

I am semi-pro gun rights, but Jesus.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/us/04guns.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=print

More States Allowing Guns in Bars and Restaurants
By MALCOLM GAY
NASHVILLE — Happy-hour beers were going for $5 at Past Perfect, a cavernous bar just off this city’s strip of honky-tonks and tourist shops when Adam Ringenberg walked in with a loaded 9-millimeter pistol in the front pocket of his gray slacks.

Mr. Ringenberg, a technology consultant, is one of the state’s nearly 300,000 handgun permit holders who have recently seen their rights greatly expanded by a new law — one of the nation’s first — that allows them to carry loaded firearms into bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

“If someone’s sticking a gun in my face, I’m not relying on their charity to keep me alive,” said Mr. Ringenberg, 30, who said he carries the gun for personal protection when he is not at work.

Gun rights advocates like Mr. Ringenberg may applaud the new law, but many customers, waiters and restaurateurs here are dismayed by the decision.

[provis99]

1. reminds me of the drunk bar owner I saw in Indianapolis

Got piss drunk, twirled out his concealed handgun to show the staff, the gun went off and hit his bartender in the leg. I expect more of this stuff as the laws go into effect.

[proteus_lives]

17. Key word: drunk.

But don't let that stop you.

Guns caused that incident, not human behavior.

[Occulus]

21. Because nobody could have predicted.... n/t

[WinkyDink]

42. I'd say there were 2 key words: "drunk" and "gun." But don't let that stop YOU.

[proteus_lives]

46. Sorry, I blame humans for their behavior.

Not inanimate objects.

[Cirque du So-What]

2. 'If someone’s sticking a gun in my face, I’m not relying on their charity to keep me alive'

Yeah, that happens to me ALL the time. It's such a pain in the ass...I go out for a drink, and the next thing ya know, I'm begging for my life because some schmuck has a gun stuck in my face. If I had a nickel for every time THAT's happened...

[mkultra]

14. ive had it happen to me

i was just talking to a girl at the bar and her boy friend didn't like it. He was loaded, i don't know if his gun was.

[Cirque du So-What]

16. Glad you lived to tell the tale

and glad for myself that I've managed to avoid situations like that...so far. At my age, however, there's not much likelihood that I'll be carousing the bars. My wife would disapprove.

[mkultra]

20. well, i was young and i dont anymore

It also hasn't motivated me to carry a gun or anything. Most trouble can be avoided.

[merqz]

3. Are business owners DISempowered?

Or are they empowered? Does the law prohibit them, as individual bar or restaurant owners from prohibiting guns, and instead open bars and restaurants up to allowing guns? Or does it force bar and restaurant owners to allow guns (iow they have no choice)?

That's a big distinction.

Here in my state, they are not allowed in bars. They are allowed in restaurants that serve liquor, in designated areas (not the bar area) and/or where the restaurant is not primarily a liquor establishment.

[BrentWil]

5. The article reads as if they are forced. But I am no expert on any of the laws. NT

[merqz]

8. I'd bet (if I were a bettin' man)

That it's more likely than not, that they could CHOOSE not to allow them in their particular establishment. But I haven't read the law either, that's just generally the way the laws are in other states that allow it.

So, IF that's true it empowers bar owners because they can choose whereas before they couldn't. Kind of like smoking bans. Without a smoking ban, bars could still CHOOSE to not allow smoking. With a ban, they are disempowered.

[Abq_Sarah]

11. Any business is allowed to prohibit firearms

These laws prevents the government from unilaterally prohibiting firearms in a private business.

[mkultra]

15. just because a business prohibits it, doesnt mean you have to obey

you can still carry in without legal penalty.

[X_Digger]

24. Actually, no.. it then becomes trespassing

At least, those are the laws here in Texas, and a few other states.

§ 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN
http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/30.06.00.html

eta: 30.06 not30.05

[mkultra]

26. well, i dont know the law here in OK regarding that

But if was one to carry, i would just ignore those notices.

[X_Digger]

27. Then yes, you probably shouldn't be carrying..

Here in TX, our permit holders have a conviction rate that is multiples less than the general public..



Comparing raw numbers, less than one percent of crimes are committed by permit holders.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/convrates.htm

[mkultra]

28. well thats kind of obtuse

previous criminal history, which often predicates crime, prevents a person from obtaining license. The none holders would be more likely based solely on that restriction.

all of my friends that carry ignore those notices as well.

[X_Digger]

33. Since the subject of the article is about concealed carry, it's spot on.

No, I can't compare to those who are otherwise eligible to procure a license but choose not to do so; however, you can't tell just by looking at someone whether or not they have a previous criminal history, or if they have (or are not disqualified from obtaining) a concealed handgun license.

If your friends carry in violation of the law (and I assume have concealed handgun licenses), how many have you turned in? Any police or news reports of this being more than anecdote?

[mkultra]

34. i havent turned them in and i wont

Trespassing is a misdemeanor and i have no interest in getting in their business.
felony convictions by CCL holders vs non CCL is not pertinent to this discussion.

[SecularMotion]

29. Meaningless statistic

since CHL holders are also less than one percent of the population.

[X_Digger]

31. No, it demonstrates that those who get permits..

.. tend to obey the laws regarding where / how they carry.

Which addresses the point of the OP of this subthread, who thought that there were no legal repercussions for those who carry in contravention of business owners' wishes.

OK carriers are legally bound to obey those signs under penalty of law. If TX (and FL, if you'd like to see those stats) are statistically representative, then, as a whole, they're a rather law-abiding group.

I don't doubt that an OK carrier might write a sternly worded letter to the owner of such a business, explaining why they will be taking their business elsewhere, though.

eta: bad grammar

[SecularMotion]

32. No, it only demonstrates that CHL holders commit crimes

at the same rate of the general population.

[X_Digger]

35. Say huh?

Perhaps I didn't explain my chart very well.

It's general public convictions per 100,000 people > 21 yoa versus CHL holder convictions per 100,000 CHL holders.

I'm not comparing CHL holders to the general public, I'm comparing each group to themselves to derive a rate, then comparing those rates against each other.

[SecularMotion]

36. From the link

"The following reports represent the number of Concealed Handgun License (CHL) holders with convictions vs. the entire TX population with convictions. "

[X_Digger]

41. Yes, I see I didn't explain it well enough..

I obtained the number of people over 21 years of age from here
http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/CHS/popdat/detailX.shtm

I obtained the number of crimes committed by CHL holders and the general public from the below link
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/convrates.htm (I subtracted those committed by CHL holders from the total to obtain only those committed by people over 21 who do not have a CHL.)

*eta: See the note at the bottom of the report- ""Total Convictions in Texas" includes all convictions reported to the state criminal history repository for the offense during the calendar year for individuals age 21 or over."

I obtained the number of active licensees for each year from here
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/demographics.htm

I put together a spreadsheet with this information.. if you'd like it, let me know, but here's a screenshot:



Let's take 2007 as an example, allow me to walk you through the numbers.

-61,260 crime convictions
-160 convictions of CHL holders
-61,100 convictions by those not having a CHL

There were 16,709,525 people over 21 years of age in 2007, and 288,909 CHL holders

160 convictions out of a pool of 288,909 permit holders.
(160 * 100,000) / 288,909 = 55.38 -- roughly 55 per 100,000 CHL holders were convicted of a crime.

61,100 convictions out of a pool of 16,709,525 people.
(61,100 * 100,000) / 16,709,525 = 365.65 -- roughly 366 per 100,000 general public over 21 were convicted of a crime.

There, clearer now?

[SecularMotion]

45. I understand you went to great lengths to skew the numbers in your favor

I understand the math you've used, although I can't attest to the accuracy of the end results.

I would suggest that you provide more detail to the source of your statistics when you post.

The link you provided does not verify the accuracy of your results.

[X_Digger]

48. So simple math is Skewing?!?!?

I gave you the sources, run your own numbers.

Click on each of the links, whip out your own calculator. Please, if my numbers are off, I'd love to hear a cogent critique!

I made sure that the convictions reported and population were both over 21, so as to have an apples-to-apples comparison. I made sure that the time frames were congruent (calendar year versus calendar year, not fiscal.) I subtracted the CHL convictions from the total, so as to not count the same conviction twice. As an additional verification measure, I compared Texas's report to the FBI's UCR (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/index.html). They match.

It's not rocket science. The hardest thing to find was population data for those over 21. (Row 45 in the spreadsheet in the zip file linked from the site listed above.)

[SecularMotion]

54. As I stated, I understand your math, although I can't attest to the accuracy of the results

Although I have taken a course in Statistic Process Control long ago, I am far from expert in statistics. I'm not denying your results may be correct, but I'm suspect of the way you have presented them. Linking to statistics from the FBI and the state of Texas does not verify your end results.

[X_Digger]

56. It's not even a statistical question, per se.

It's simple data collation.

There's very little methodology to critique- the only two possibilities are that either the numbers are off, or my method to determine rates is wrong.

Do you have reason to believe that any of the primary numbers are wrong? In what way? Do you believe my method of determining rate is flawed? If so, how?

[ThomWV]

25. Here in WV any business owner can put a "No Guns" sign in his door and its enforcable

The CCW law in West Virginia allows that any business or home owner can deny entry to anyone with a gun. At least that is what we were indoctrinated with during the state-required 'training' to get our carry permits. I always look and a few places have the signs that say no guns allowed.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

4. Thank god! What if the dang injuns start attacking bars?

At least we can count on some folks to pertect us.

[baldguy]

6. But a .45 slug is the perfect chaser to any alcoholic beverage.

[Cirque du So-What]

9. Makes you wonder how to order in a bar

Be careful how you tell the barkeep that you want a shot!

[sharesunited]

7. Nothing like having your judgment clouded on TWO levels lol.

[doc03]

10. I fell for the CCW line, first I bought a gun and ammo that ran me

about $650 total, then I took the CCW course that cost another $200 total. After the course I realized the gun I had chosen was too big to actually carry. So then I went out and bought another more practical gun for around $350 counting ammo. I carried the gun for a couple weeks and figured out it was kind of ridiculous, I am 62 and never in my entire life have I ever been in a position to need a gun for protection. I haven't carried a gun for probably over a year now. I would call it a $1200 mistake, proves you are never to old to learn. If you just need a gun for home defence a cheap shotgun is better than a semi-auto pistol and you don't need a CCW permit in your home anyway. So far I haven't needed a gun to defend myself at Bob Evans either.

[mmonk]

12. Guns and booze. Can't get any safer than that.

:sarcasm:

[wtmusic]

13. And to think there are some who still don't want rocket launchers in bars.

We're in for a long struggle.

[Obamanaut]

18. If we cut the benefits of military retirees, fewer people will be able to

afford guns.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=9246337

[HopeHoops]

19. Guns & Booze - GREAT idea!!! Just WONDERFUL! Brilliant one!

Next thing you know, they'll want to give the nuke button to a complete fucking moron - wait, they already did that for eight years.

[cynatnite]

22. What's important is that you can't smoke...

:sarcasm:

[X_Digger]

23. Doesn't seem to be a problem in the other states that don't restrict it..

And it does give choice back to bar owners- they choose, not the local government, whether or not to allow patrons to carry.

[SecularMotion]

30. Another meaningless statistic

From the article -

"20 other states — New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts among them — that do not address the question, appearing by default to allow those with permits to carry guns into establishments that serve alcohol"

[X_Digger]

37. Nulla poena sine lege

If there isn't a law against a behavior or action, then it's legal.

[SecularMotion]

38. Your chart is deceptive

You include states that have not addressed the issue as "Carry Allowed"

[virginia mountainman]

39. LOL... Simply put..

If their is no law against it, it is LEGAL....

It really is not a hard concept to comprehend...

[SecularMotion]

40. It is legal by default

But to use that as a statistic to portray the number of states that ALLOW against the number of states that have addressed the issue and decided to NOT ALLOW is dishonest and deceptive.

[X_Digger]

44. How so?

Would you have been happier if the diagram had said "States that disallow carry in restaurants that serve alcohol"??

Same information- it is legal to carry in a restaurant* that serves alcohol in a majority of states.



*The only fuzziness is in how different states define 'bars' v 'restaurant'- some go by state license classification, others go by what percentage of revenue comes from sale of alcoholic beverages to be consumed on-site. (51%+ = bar, etc).

[SecularMotion]

47. A more honest diagram would be

States who allow

v.

States who do not allow

v.

States who have not addressed the issue

[X_Digger]

49. Now who's being disingenuous?

How very authoritarian of you! You make it seem as though some action will be taken, but the legislature just hasn't gotten around to it yet.

That may be what you wish but it's nowhere near reality.

[SecularMotion]

51. "You make it seem as though some action will be taken"

and you make it seem as though some action has already been taken.

Who's being disingenuous?

[X_Digger]

53. "Allowed", "Legal" -- neither is an affirmative action.

Hence the latin quote above.

You may have connected the two, but the philosophy of law doesn't make that distinction.

[slackmaster]

52. A state that has not explicitly addressed the issue allows it.

It's pretty simple.

[SecularMotion]

55. It's not quite that simple

So far we've relied on the common sense that alcohol and guns do not mix as a rule to follow. The anti-gun regulation lobby is now challenging that and forcing states to address the issue. To say that states ALLOW it simply because the common sense hasn't been challenged is dishonest.

[slackmaster]

57. No state allows concealed-weapons permit holders to carry guns while drunk

Every state explicitly prohibits that.

[WinkyDink]

43. Republican Motto: We'll Enforce the Law AFTER You're Shot.

[thelordofhell]

50. Tell that to the town of Big Whiskey

They banned guns and still got shot up by William Muney.