NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
General Categories => Carry Issues => Topic started by: JH65 on August 07, 2015, 06:00:50 PM
-
Evidently the new Alamo Draft house Cinema opening in LaVista will be a gun free zone. Stating that "Due to Nebraska law, we are unable to allow any licensed citizens with a legally concealed firearm to enter into our facility because we serve alcohol."
Wondering how many of this group will comment on their Facebook page, letting them know how much more business they could have. I've seen several members comment. Can we get several hundred more?!
-
If Alamo Draft house Cinema makes makes more than 51% of their income from sales of alcohol, then they fall under state law as a banned place.
If that is the case here, the management does not have any say in the matter
-
Agreed. Keyword being "IF". They made this call because they will be serving alcohol, not because of 51%. Between ticket sales, concessions, and food, I'd be very surprised that 51% will be alcohol sales. Then again. Can't say before it opens.
-
I actually RESPECT their response and my interpretation is "Hey the problem is not personal it's the stupid law ... call your Senator."
-
Quick Win here.
The owner of this LaVista location just contacted Justin and I asking us to call him. I just got off the phone with him and he claims there was a misunderstanding by the guy handling the facebook page. The owner, Tyler Calabrese, tells me that he absolutely will not restrict carry and is a CHP holder himself.
-
Can the owner confirm the 51% question
-
Can the owner confirm the 51% question
Do you REALLY want to know the answer to that question? No signs leaves it up to the guess of the customer. Like JH65 said..."IF". Maybe this is a dog that should be allowed to lay quietly.
Fly
-
Do you REALLY want to know the answer to that question?
Yes, otherwise I would not have asked
-
I have often wondered about the 51% rule.
Is it 51% of gross profit, or 51% of total revenue?
How could a business that has not even opened yet answer that question?
Greg58
-
I have often wondered about the 51% rule.
Is it 51% of gross profit, or 51% of total revenue?
How could a business that has not even opened yet answer that question?
Greg58
Projections in a business plan. That business is a science when it comes to projections they should know how much they should be making each night off of each seat in the place.
Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
-
I wonder: Is the 51% rule constitutional? After all, isn't it impermissibly vague as to how the calculation is to be performed? And, isn't it irrational to requires the permit holder to make a conclusion based on facts not available to the public (i.e. is this establishment making more than 51% of money from liquor sales... at any given time, and over what interval)?
But, how does one establish court standing without first being place in jeopardy via arrest, confiscation, and fine/jail?
-
I wonder: Is the 51% rule constitutional? After all, isn't it impermissibly vague as to how the calculation is to be performed? And, isn't it irrational to requires the permit holder to make a conclusion based on facts not available to the public (i.e. is this establishment making more than 51% of money from liquor sales... at any given time, and over what interval)?
But, how does one establish court standing without first being place in jeopardy via arrest, confiscation, and fine/jail?
You are correct in that we are put int he position of having to guess the income percentages for a restaurant before carrying in that location. I believe we had an bill before the unicameral that dealt with this issue this year by requiring the facility to post a sign indicating if they were over 50%. However, I don't think it went all that far.
-
I'm thinking the prohibition on carrying at a "political rally or fundraiser" is also unconstitutionally vague. What constitute a "political rally"? A sign protest? Petition gathering? When guys sit around drinking coffee and talking politics? When the number in the "rally" is more than three? Or, if someone passes a hat for donations?
Is there text of changes we (NFOA) want to add to/modify the CC statutes?
-
Is there text of changes we (NFOA) want to add to/modify the CC statutes?
Yes....I think that most of us would scrap at least half of it....or rewrite the entire thing. There were a couple of bills this year that aimed at making some changes to the Nebraska Concealed Handgun Permit act but none of them gained much steam.
In my opinion the Nebraska Legislature doesn't make firearm bills much of a priority because so few people contact their state senator to voice their concerns.
I also spoke with the owner of the Alamo Draft house via messenger...still waiting on a returned call. I initially saw someone posted on facebook that they were not going to allow ccw....I went to the facebook page, asked the question differently, was told that they had spoke to other locations & the lavista police & decided to not allow it... after a few more exchanges the post disappeared & we received messages that it is allowed & the person in charge of their Facebook page misspoke.
-
Yes, otherwise I would not have asked
So you find out that a particular business has 51%+ of revenue from alcohol sales when you previously could not be expected to have reasonable knowledge of this. What have you gained except knowledge that preempts you from carrying in this establishment where before you could have argued that there was no way to know. Obviously, you could not argue that you were unaware a business which only sells alcohol and peanuts would be off limits to CC, but if it is a business where there is a reasonable doubt...why ask?
Fly
-
Why ask? To generate discussion of the 51% rule.
-
Why ask? To generate discussion of the 51% rule.
Understood, discussion is good/informative. Though this can be done without business specific information. As they say, ignorance is bliss, or at least in this case ignorance is a potential defense in charges related to carrying in a prohibited place.
Fly
-
or at least in this case ignorance is a potential defense in charges related to carrying in a prohibited place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorantia_juris_non_excusat
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorantia_juris_non_excusat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorantia_juris_non_excusat)
It should be for the following reasons:
http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1031 (http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1031)
Just like the percentage of income attributed to the sale of alcohol cannot be factually known unless the owner posts his financials on the door (thus making a "no guns" sign his easy way out - by design of the drafters of the legislation no doubt), it is not possible to know all the laws which carry financial or prison punishments. How many people know that picking up a feather off the ground makes them liable for heavy fines and prison time IF.the feather is from a protected species?
-
The owner, Tyler J. Calabrese, tells me that revenue projections for alcohol are maybe 22%.
Now we know.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorantia_juris_non_excusat
Ignorantia juris non excusat or ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Latin for "ignorance of the law does not excuse" or "ignorance of the law excuses no one") is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because he or she was unaware of its content.
This is applicable if a person is claiming they did not know that such a law exists, but we are talking about a person who knows the law exists. It is impractical or even impossible for a person to apply the 51% rule unless, as GreyGeek commented, the owner publicly posts his financials.
As I said in my example, if a person gets cited for carrying in an establishment that sells only peanuts and alcohol, they would have a losing argument. Much in the same way a person can argue in a SD situation that a "reasonable man" would be in fear for their life and warranted in using deadly force, a reasonable person may not have any way to discern which establishments are off limits.
Fly