Interesting situation with ccw and alcohol sales. Need help

[SemperFiGuy]

Bullit.........[Shane], Come Back!!!!!!!    We Need You.......]

If the point is that knowledgeable handgun attorneys are rare, there will be no argument from me.

NE State Patrol says that CHP-citizens should consult such an attorney to learn our rights and responsibilities under the NE handgun laws.   In facts case, nobody does.   I haven't, either.   We don't have that much experience yet under these relatively new CHP laws, so an entire litany of unresolved issues exists for which time will be required to unravel.

[Andy Allen:   Please make a rule that NFOA members are allowed a maximum of two (2) posts/day so I'll be forced to go do something of redeeming social value.]

sfg

[AAllen]

SFG I consider this to be of redeeming social value, so if I had control of this I would deny your request.   These discussions are a big part of how we educate each other and find problems and issues that we need to address legislatively.

[bullit]

Like Ernie Chambers..."I'm back".... slow at the office this morning with patient flow.  Ditto with SFG...you don't want to be the test case  The best to do is become as knowledgeable about the laws as possible thus my appreciation of this site and our discussions.  That being said, it ain't hard to become more versed in the law than most NE attorneys with regards to firearms/self defense law.  They are exposed very little in school and reality (and that is a simple fact coming from my interviews with numerous attorneys I have met across this great state). 
Until next time or Andy has Dan ban me.....

[NE Bull]

I would add that the law is vague to the point of whether a CHP holder is an Employee or Customer of said establishment.  I would also venture as far as to say I (of absolutely no law experience besides a speeding ticket(s) and divorce/custody laws) would think the INTENT of the law would be to prohibit the customer and not the owner/employee.  As in a church one is prohibited unless a member of 'security' and also Banks and Security guards. (?).
You have us all intrigued and thinking (now stoppit dammit before I hurt a brain cell or two)

[smitty81]

Playing Hooky from School for a Coupla Hours, Contractors are All Gone from the House, Obviously I've Got Way Too Much Excess Time on My Hands This Morning to Spend on the Forum, So...........

As is happens, Nebraska has about a zillion different kinds of liquor licenses.

Looky Here:    http://www.lcc.ne.gov/formsdiv.html

Title 272, NAC 21, Section 018.01M reads as follows:

018 PROHIBITED PLACES AND PREMISES
Establishment having a liquor license which derives over one-half of its income from the sale of alcoholic liquor;

Doesn't say exactly, specifically, precisely, and very clearly just which of the many kinds of liquor licenses ares addressed here and whether the income is wholesale, retail, or whatever.    Trial case has to go before a judge, get adjudicated, make new case law to cover this particular situation.

You don't want it to be your case.

sfg

Exactly, it dosen't specify. To me, the way it's written it includes all of them. It dosen't say this law excludes any places or different types of licenses so to be on the safe side, you just have to go by what the written law actually says. You can't assume anything here.

[AAllen]

Hey I don't ask for anyone to be banned.  I like a little lively discussion every now and then, keeps me on my toes.

[SemperFiGuy]

Darn you, AndyAllen!!!!

sfg

[smitty81]

I would add that the law is vague to the point of whether a CHP holder is an Employee or Customer of said establishment.  I would also venture as far as to say I (of absolutely no law experience besides a speeding ticket(s) and divorce/custody laws) would think the INTENT of the law would be to prohibit the customer and not the owner/employee.  As in a church one is prohibited unless a member of 'security' and also Banks and Security guards. (?).
You have us all intrigued and thinking (now stoppit dammit before I hurt a brain cell or two)

The thing is though, it is a written law that the churches/banks can have armed security, it's actually written.

There is nothing written about being an owner of any business, consumption on premises, different types of liquor liscenses........

It's very vague. 

[dkarp]

And with Ernie Chambers likely back in the Legislature next  2 sessions, good luck getting anything changed for the next 8 years. (12 if the term extension amendment passes.)

[CitizenClark]

And with Ernie Chambers likely back in the Legislature next  2 sessions, good luck getting anything changed for the next 8 years. (12 if the term extension amendment passes.)

Ernie Chambers is 75 now. He may work out and live right (I don't know), but I don't believe he will be a sitting state senator when he is 87 years old.

[bullit]

The main thing about The Cobra is keeping him off the Judiciary Committee which I would hope the Unicam members are smart enough to do..alas I dream.....

[unfy]

I love this thread and it's had me scratching my head all along.  Can't wait for some non-oh-sh!t resolution to the matter

[Chris Z]

My 2 cents.... Keeping in mind I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY...

NE CHP law says you cannot carry in your place of work since more than 50% of your revenue is derived from the sale of alcoholic beverages....

However, consider this under 69-2445 and 28-1202 sec 1b:

69-2445. Carrying concealed weapon under other law; act; how construed.

Nothing in the Concealed Handgun Permit Act prevents a person from carrying a concealed weapon as permitted under section 28-1202.




28-1202. Carrying concealed weapon; penalty; affirmative defense.

(1)(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, any person who carries a weapon or weapons concealed on or about his or her person, such as a handgun, a knife, brass or iron knuckles, or any other deadly weapon, commits the offense of carrying a concealed weapon.

(b) It is an affirmative defense that the defendant was engaged in any lawful business, calling, or employment at the time he or she was carrying any weapon or weapons and the circumstances in which such person was placed at the time were such as to justify a prudent person in carrying the weapon or weapons for the defense of his or her person, property, or family.


There is an out as I point out above, keeping in mind under the affirmative defense, should you have to use this firearm and you are charged with CCW... The burden of proof shifts to you initially to prove that you were justified in carrying the weapon.


Rather be judged by 12 or carried by 6?

[lunchbox]

My CHP instructor was under the impression that if I had a signed document from the President/owner stating that I'm allowed to carry a weapon at work, would help the situation. But as said before, I don't want to trust one persons opinion. I was hoping this thread turned into what it has. A healthy discussion regarding a gray area, not so easily defined. My instructor is the Chief of police in a town in Nebraska. Too bad the brewery isn't in the same town he is. I think for now, as I stated earlier in the thread. I'm just going to open carry while at work.

[smitty81]

My CHP instructor was under the impression that if I had a signed document from the President/owner stating that I'm allowed to carry a weapon at work, would help the situation. But as said before, I don't want to trust one persons opinion. I was hoping this thread turned into what it has. A healthy discussion regarding a gray area, not so easily defined. My instructor is the Chief of police in a town in Nebraska. Too bad the brewery isn't in the same town he is. I think for now, as I stated earlier in the thread. I'm just going to open carry while at work.

The other thing I think that has to be taken into consideration is that even someone such as a cop or a attorney may not have the answer either. While they are in a better position to answer then most of us, they won't have the final say.

Since none of this has been through court, there is no real answer as to right or wrong.

I think this was all said earlier.