Arizona moves to allow concealed guns in bars


PDA






Blue .45
June 28, 2009, 10:45 PM
I haven't seen this posted yet. I'm curious what you all think about this. If you were a bar owner, would you allow Concealed carry in your place?

Edit: I don't think the nonsense in the first paragraph applies, because this bill would not allow the armed people to drink. However, I'm not sure what to think about this. In any case, Arizona is light years ahead of my home state of Illinois on the issue of gun rights. God bless you.




PHOENIX – There was a time in the Wild West that cowboys had to check their guns before they could pull up a bar stool for a drink — rules that protected against the saloon gunfights that came to define the frontier era in places like Arizona.

But a bill moving through the Arizona Legislature has some bar owners fearful that the state is turning back the clock to the Old West. Lawmakers are considering a bill that would allow anyone with a concealed-weapons permit to bring a handgun into bars and restaurants serving alcohol.

The bill gives bars discretion to keep gun-toting patrons out, and anyone with a weapon would not be allowed to drink. But the bill has angered bar owners who believe booze and guns are a recipe for disaster.

"This might be one of the stupidest things that I have heard of," said Mike Nelson, who owns Pomeroy's bar in Phoenix and plans to post a sign on his front door outlawing guns in his bar as soon as possible. "Can you think of a single reason guns and alcohol should be intertwined?"

The bill is part of a nationwide push by the National Rifle Association. Georgia passed a similar law in 2008, as did Tennessee earlier this year in becoming the 40th state to allow bar or restaurant patrons to carry guns.

"These laws are common sense," said NRA spokeswoman Rachel Parsons. "Restaurants are not immune to criminal activity. Law-abiding people — regardless of whether they're in restaurants, cars or homes — they should be able to protect themselves against criminal attack."

One of the bill's sponsors, Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, said it's about time Arizona passes such a law, and that the most important thing is that people carrying guns into bars aren't allowed to drink.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090628/ap_on_re_us/us_guns_in_bars

If you enjoyed reading about "Arizona moves to allow concealed guns in bars" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
HammerheadSSN663
June 28, 2009, 11:12 PM
"This might be one of the stupidest things that I have heard of," said Mike Nelson, who owns Pomeroy's bar in Phoenix and plans to post a sign on his front door outlawing guns in his bar as soon as possible. "Can you think of a single reason guns and alcohol should be intertwined?"


Cause its more manly digging out a logged Colt .45 slug in your thigh with your heated Bowie knife if you buddy is pouring on a bottle of rot gut vs. a bottle of Isopropel alcohol?

Cause it would be a lot less cooler if Clint shot that bounty hunter right after he says, "I had to come back." and Clint says, "I know." if he was drinking a glass of tea?



hell, I could go in all night with this.....

mljdeckard
June 29, 2009, 12:01 AM
If you were a bar owner in Utah, you wouldn't have a choice. Other than you can refuse to serve anyone for any reason. But it's not against the law to carry in a bar here. I got wanded at a club and had to take my gun back to the trunk.

Blue .45
June 29, 2009, 01:44 AM
If you were a bar owner in Utah, you wouldn't have a choice. Other than you can refuse to serve anyone for any reason. But it's not against the law to carry in a bar here. I got wanded at a club and had to take my gun back to the trunk.

I didn't know that. I thought Arizona was breaking new ground here. If you guys aren't having a substantial amount of bar shootings, then Arizona shouldn't have much to worry about either.

rfurtkamp
June 29, 2009, 01:48 AM
Idaho there's no prohibition either.

armoredman
June 29, 2009, 02:08 AM
They do this every year, it's not "guns in bars", it's allowing responsible CCW permit holders to carry in resteraunts that happen to serve alcohol, and refrain from drinking while carrying. There are many resteraunts we cannot patronize because of this, that we would like to, but due to this restriction, we cannot. The left demonizes it every time.

Valkman
June 29, 2009, 02:10 AM
It's sure not a problem in NV, we can carry in bars and casinos.

Boba Fett
June 29, 2009, 02:11 AM
If you were a bar owner, would you allow Concealed carry in your place?

I generally think firearms and alcohol are pretty much a safety hazard, wherever they are mixed.

Though I'm not opposed to carry in bars per se.


However, I am opposed to drinking and carrying. Carry in a bar all you want, but leave the alcohol alone if you do. You can be the "designated carry" and your friends can drink.


I think that so long as there are insanely strict punishments that are upheld for people who drink and carry, then I'm for carry in bars. After all, why punish the upstanding citizen? Just punish those who choose to not be.

Extremely Pro Gun
June 29, 2009, 02:14 AM
Its a good idea because it would allow you to carry into a restaurant that serves alcohol. And on top of that, there is always a legal operating limit on firearms. SO, if the person was over this limit they are breaking the law by having the gun on them then.

What if some guy gets pissed off and goes home for his gun without anyone armed in the bar, he can line them up and exterminate everyone in the place. And if he was planing on killin people then he doesnt give a **** about the no guns in bars law.

Kind of Blued
June 29, 2009, 03:04 AM
Colorado has no prohibition, and I've enjoyed this particular freedom many times. It's about as insane of an idea as letting people drive cars at 60mph in opposite directions just feet away from each other with nothing seperating them.

I haven't pulled my gun out at a bar and caused trouble yet for the same reason that I haven't swerved into the other lane just as another car is approaching me; it's not in anyone's best interest, especially mine.

Ragnar Danneskjold
June 29, 2009, 03:13 AM
I wish Michigan allowed this. I go to the bar quite often, but refrain from drinking. It's a nice place to play pool with friend and other things. They all carry as well, and it's pretty tedious to have us all lock our weapons up before going in. Being the designated driver and carrier is a great idea.

Sam1911
June 29, 2009, 08:16 AM
Not much "blood in the streets" here in PA. No prohibition. You can carry in any bar or restaurant and have a beer when carrying, too -- no problem.

Don't be DRUNK. If you can keep it straight with your car, you can keep it straight with your gun.

Seriously, the idea of drunks with guns really gets people nervous. In reality, it just doesn't prove to be a problem.

-Sam

riverrat373
June 29, 2009, 07:05 PM
One of the Prime Directives of gun ownership: Alcohol and guns don't mix!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

petie6464
June 29, 2009, 10:42 PM
I live in a resort town in AZ, Lake Havasu City and have CCW permit. There has been a lot of talk in the local paper regarding this and a few restaurant/bars have admitted that they will not allow CCW's. Its been great as I have been able to compile a list of these non-amendment supporters and distribute to the many CCW's and supporters of our rights in town. We have all "banned" their establishments. Keep it up owners so we can hopefully cost you money and hopefully drive you out of business. Best yet one of these morons have been robbed, namely the Red Robin, what a idiot!

JHK94
June 30, 2009, 01:55 AM
I mean, one thing I don't get about this debate is that it isn't illegal to have had several drinks and carry (say I have several beers, then my wife drives me to the grocery store while I'm armed), but it is illegal for me to be 100% stone sober in a Denny's that serves beer.

Sam1911
June 30, 2009, 06:55 AM
One of the Prime Directives of gun ownership: Alcohol and guns don't mix!

Like most statements that can be boiled down to fit on a t-shirt or bumper-sticker, this misses the point by a mile. And it's the kind of thoughtless snap-judgement that gets laws like this on the books in the first place.

No alcohol at the range? Fine. No alcohol before hunting or target shooting? Ok. Those are both exemplary personal policies that we can all agree to follow. Can't carry in a bar or restaurant that serves alcohol? Uh, no, that's stupid.

Alcohol -- especially just the presence of it nearby -- doesn't turn the CCW licensed citizen into a homicidal maniac. Nor does it make him/her a dangerous public menace. In a self-defense shooting situation, the presence of alcohol (in the area, and especially in the shooter's blood) raises the level of scrutiny significantly, but a justified shooting is still legitimate self-defense. I didn't check my right to life and the defense of my family at the door when I walked into Applebees. Nor did I when I had a Sam Adams with dinner.

But, when we "gun folks" toss off such "Prime Directives" as though they were to-the-point answers to such situations, we just drive nails in our own coffins.
:(
[Sigh.]

-Sam

geronimo509
June 30, 2009, 07:07 AM
PA doesnt have a lot of bar shootings. There happen to be some shootings at bars or right outside, but 99% of the people did not have a LTCF and the gun was stolen and had the serial scratched off. Most responsible gun owners and more specifically, the people who carry regularly, will not get drunk while carrying. Of course, there are exceptions but they probably shouldn't have been allowed to carry in the first place.

jackstinson
June 30, 2009, 07:15 AM
Ohio has HB 203 in the works again also. Hopefully it will make it through.
It is pretty silly that we have to leave our handgun in the car while we go into a restaurant which serves beer. Extrapolate the worst case and: The gun is stolen from the car, the thief decides to rob the restaurant also....now your car is damaged and both your gun and your wallet are stolen...if you were lucky. But everyone is safe from the sober man with a CHL who just wanted a burger at Applebees with his family.
At least it's better now here than it was a year ago. Then I could not carry into the grocery store or a Stop'n'Go that sold beer on Sunday...due to the "class D" alcohol vending license restriction. That got changed last September.

UhKlem
June 30, 2009, 03:01 PM
Drunkenness and guns don't mix well; I never handle guns when I'm drunk, they stay right in the holster where they belong, whether I'm wearing the holster or not. I don't know why everyone assumes drinking means getting drunk.

As to the potential law change for Arizona: it's about time. Adjacent states such as Colorado or Utah have no problem recognizing that leaving guns in cars is a bad idea.

From a practical standpoint the law won't change much behavior. Criminals don't care about the current law, and those who would otherwise not be criminals except for the current prohibition often 'forget' that they are carrying. If they can't forget, well, maybe they need a better holster ;-)

chris in va
June 30, 2009, 03:05 PM
I think it's safe to say the vast majority of CC permit holders don't go get sloshed when carrying. We had this issue brought up in VA, trying to get restaurant CC legal. Currently you still have to open carry if you want to have a steak at Texas Roadhouse.

indiandave
June 30, 2009, 03:31 PM
The state of Pennsylvania trusts me to have a drink at dinner and not shoot anybody.

riverrat373
June 30, 2009, 06:35 PM
My statement about "guns and alcohol not mixing" relates to carrying AND consuming alcohol not about being in a restaurant that serves alcohol! I see no reason for a person who goes into a BAR or TAVERN TO CONSUME ALCOHOL to be carrying a firearm. I don't believe that even off duty law enforcement officers should carry while drinking alcohol.

JHK94
June 30, 2009, 06:39 PM
I don't understand why my ability to defend myself should be constrained by the fact I have had a drink or two.

Yo Mama
June 30, 2009, 06:45 PM
I live in AZ. I contacted the bar owner in an azcentral hit piece on the bill. This a-hole tells me he's an avid gun owner, but doesn't want guns in his bar. "It'll be chaos". He then said to have some balls and open carry into his bar :eek: I told him I don't carry a gun to intimidate or threaten anyone, and that he is making the assumption gun owners want to start fights.

Guy really pissed me off. Said I'd never frequent his sports bar. The notion he had was that guns and alcohol never should mix. On top of this, the penalties weren't enough for him if someone was drinking and had a gun on them.

In the end, I told him he was a hoplophobe and that he was no friend to gun owners. It's ok for the owner to pack, but not me. Forget it.

riverrat373
June 30, 2009, 06:59 PM
I support the right to carry and I even believe that if someone can legally own a firearm that they should be able to carry concealed without a license. I also believe that there are times when it's better to leave the gun at home.
Alcohol clouds the better judgment of all of us. The best way to avoid getting into a situation that might compromise our safety is to be aware of our surroundings at all times.

If you do get into a situation that requires you to draw your weapon to defend yourself, you can bet that you are going to be put under a microscope by the police, district attorneys trying to make a name for themselves and lawyers trying to make a fast buck!

Having consumed alcohol and then shooting someone is going to raise a lot of red flags all around. Even if no charges are brought against you because it was determined that the shooting was justifiable, you can probably bet a civil lawsuit will be brought against you. What if you get an anti gun jury?

leadcounsel
June 30, 2009, 07:02 PM
Well I generally don't like prohibitions on carrying in certain locations like bars, colleges, etc. This generally means you have to go to and from the bar or restaurant (and any other location) unarmed.

I support carry in bars and restaurants. Just rely on people to act like adults.

JHK94
June 30, 2009, 07:03 PM
Yeah, I'm sure I'll be really glad when I get mugged and killed that I was unarmed because I had a beer.

hso
June 30, 2009, 07:07 PM
I thought Arizona was breaking new ground here. Hardly. Plenty of states allow permit holders to carry in bars and restaurants, whether they drink or not while there, and you don't hear of cartoonish gunfights breaking out.

Irresponsible gun toting drunks don't pay attention to the law anyway so restrictions on carry for permit holders in establishments that serve alcohol for consumption on the premises accomplish nothing.

Permit holders aren't the folks you have to worry about, especially when their permit is on the line.

HarryB
June 30, 2009, 08:54 PM
Hardly. Plenty of states allow permit holders to carry in bars and restaurants, whether they drink or not while there, and you don't hear of cartoonish gunfights breaking out.

Irresponsible gun toting drunks don't pay attention to the law anyway so restrictions on carry for permit holders in establishments that serve alcohol for consumption on the premises accomplish nothing.

Permit holders aren't the folks you have to worry about, especially when their permit is on the line.

I believe that 38 states allow carry into liquor serving restaurants. Hard to believe that Arizona isn't one of them.

Noebb
June 30, 2009, 09:21 PM
In CO, No problem with it. Have carried many times in bars, restaurants that serve alcohol, night clubs etc. Never had a problem.

As long as the CCW holder is not drinking no problem.

Oh, CCW holder also needs to be sure not to let the people he/she is with pull him/her into a bad situation. Know when to walk away and go home.

tpaw
June 30, 2009, 09:44 PM
I haven't seen this posted yet. I'm curious what you all think about this. If you were a bar owner, would you allow Concealed carry in your place?

Absolutely not! I've already seen too many ventilated ceilings and gun shot wounds from booze muscles. Leave the machismo and hardware out the door.
Their are the three "B's" that are the downfall to man, Booze,
Bucks and Broads. I'll add a fourth, Ballistics.

HarryB
June 30, 2009, 09:59 PM
Everywhere there seems to be a knee jerk reaction that CCW holders are all of a sudden get loaded and proceed to shoot to slidelock. Sheesh the bill criminalizes drinking while carrying! Right now it would be nice to be able to take responsibility for myself and family while in a restaurant instead of being a criminal by carrying by present laws.

dmazur
June 30, 2009, 10:36 PM
While the comparison isn't exact, as driving a car isn't a right, I think it may help understand the problem if one suggested that bar patrons should not be allowed to drive their cars to the establishment. After all, drinking and driving don't mix, and the presumption that all bar patrons imbibe to excess is correct, right?

I believe in "loss of normal life" sentencing for drunk driving, and a similar penalty for negligent use of a firearm while drunk.

I know it's not that easy, as it does complicate things if you perform a "good shoot" against an assailant while drunk. Nevertheless, I believe people should be presumed innocent of wrongdoing until they commit the wrongful act.

Way too many gun laws assume the opposite. (A classic one is prohibition of carrying a handgun for self-defense while bowhunting. Some states recognize the folly of this, but most assume you are going to use the gun for hunting, illegally. And, for many years, carrying a loaded handgun was prohibited in National Parks and other NPS-adminstered lands. Same argument - you're going to use it for poaching.)

Edit - I'm aware that National Park carry is still against the law, until Feb 2010. However, a lot of administrators think the new law is nuts, as they believe possession will automatically lead to misuse.

Kind of Blued
July 1, 2009, 04:16 AM
Is there some projection occuring here? I've lawfully carried concealed firearms into bars. I've lawfully enjoyed many a beer while doing so. Never have I become drunk or done anything which I wouldn't have done if I had not been drinking.

Are some of the people here unsure if they could conduct themselves in a lawful, appropriate manner after one or two drinks? And why do these people think that their lack of self-control should be translated into a law which diminishes the freedoms of more responsible individuals?

I carry a gun for self-protection because I don't want to be killed, or otherwise seriously harmed. Going to the type of bar that will very likely feature a sudden fistfight/brawl is detrimental to my entire premise of self-protection, safety, and smart decisions, whether I take a gun or not.

If you don't trust yourself to conduct yourself in a reasonable manner at a bar, don't take a gun.

If you don't trust the other patrons of the bar to abstain from killing or harming you, don't go in the first place.

Either way, don't diminish my rights because you're insecure or otherwise incapable of making reasonable decisions for yourself.

HK G3
July 1, 2009, 05:34 AM
+1 Kind of Blued, +1

Officers'Wife
July 1, 2009, 08:13 AM
The bill gives bars discretion to keep gun-toting patrons out, and anyone with a weapon would not be allowed to drink. But the bill has angered bar owners who believe booze and guns are a recipe for disaster.

If I owned an establishment that served alcohol the idea of an honest person with a weapon wouldn't be an issue. However, the moment that person ordered a drink s/he would be asked to leave and never return. But then I have a low tolerance for the use of alcohol under any circumstance and fully believe DUI should be a capital offense.

loneviking
July 1, 2009, 10:42 AM
This whole dustup over guns' in bars and drinking has me shaking my head in disbelief. In Nevada, you can drink while armed and you can't even be cited for being drunk until your BAC is .10! We don't have problems with drunken shootouts in bars. I asked my local sheriff if he'd ever arrested anybody with a CCW that was both armed and drunk, and he couldn't remember any incident. There's a lot of fear mongering going on here that is just absurd...

Jamie C.
July 1, 2009, 11:00 AM
If you don't trust yourself to conduct yourself in a reasonable manner at a bar, don't take a gun.

Better still, don't go to bars if you can't behave, since irresponsible behavior will most likely have a bad outcome even without a gun present.

And no, AZ isn't breaking new ground; TN passed a similar law just this past month.



J.C.

Maverick223
July 1, 2009, 12:47 PM
I believe you should either be permitted to have a gun or drink alcohol (to the point of legal intoxication), but not both at once. Carrying in a bar (or other establishment that distributes alcohol) I have no problems with even if you have a couple drinks; but if you are intoxicated you should be strictly forbidden. :)

camslam
July 1, 2009, 01:08 PM
First, it is about friggin time that AZ got this passed. Brewer had better sign it into law and not pull a Ja-No and veto it.

Second, the argument of guns + alcohol has good points on both sides, but I would like to point out the following common sense thinking:

-CCW permit holders for the most part, by nature seem to be cautious, responsible, law abiding, attentive people. (There are exceptions like in anything, but we are talking about the vast majority)

-Because of those attributes, I don't think you see on a regular basis, CCW permit holders frequented bars, restaurants, or popular watering holes/cantinas, and then proceeding to get as sloshed as they can.

-If that were the case, why don't you see the usual predictions of "bloodbaths" and "old west shootouts" happening in states that already allow people to drink and CCW?

-Bottom line: with the sheer number of permit carriers now in existence, you will have an incident at some point where someone is drinking, perhaps to excess, and makes a poor decision, that costs them plenty. But it will be far more rare, than the usual number of other incidents, non-gun related, that happen all the time at bars and restaurants, around this country.

It is about time that I can now LEGALLY carry a concealed weapon into restaurants when I take my wife and children to dinner. I'll never understand the moronic, idiotic, ignorant, stupid, dumb, and illogical rationale of people that think once a person with a CCW permit and weapon crosses the threshold from their car, the sidewalk, street, or some other boundary where it is legal to carry and they have done no harm, but then entering into a "school zone", "bar", "restaurant", "post office", "airport" or some other "government building", they immediately go into killer mode and become a danger to those around them. It is asinine and I will never understand it. :banghead:

HarryB
July 1, 2009, 02:00 PM
Glad to see this passed. Brewer had said she'll sign it.

ZO6Vettever
July 1, 2009, 03:17 PM
In Florida we can carry in a restaurant/bar (TGIFridays etc.) but cannot sit at the bar, go figure???

ArmedBear
July 1, 2009, 05:22 PM
Idaho treats guns like cars.

You can go essentially anywhere with it, including a bar. Just don't get caught above .08% BAL.

We have ZERO trouble with this. There's no evidence that legal CC in a bar is a problem.

I think it can be a very bad idea to drink and carry (possible civil suit, anyone?), but why should I have to worry about whether a "grill" is really a "bar", or whether I can go to the restaurant restroom through the bar with my gun?

runrabbitrun
July 1, 2009, 05:35 PM
I get drunk once in a while.
Piss me off when I'm drinking...
I might shoot your ass.
(Not really, I don't handle firearms when drinking)...

I see no reason why non drinking people should
have to go into restaurants unarmed.

If I get stupid.. well let the non drinking let me know.
If I pull a pistol over an argument about who won the World Series...
SHOOT my ass. :D

Maverick223
July 1, 2009, 05:43 PM
SHOOT my assI agree. :neener:

TheFallGuy
July 1, 2009, 06:02 PM
In a restaurant that serves alcohol, CCW is fine with me. I use the 50% to define restaurant from a bar. If 50% or more revenue comes from booze, it's a bar to me. In a bar though-I don't like it. I have gotten into too many fights with people in bars to think allowing firearms is a good idea. If you can't legally drive a car because you are drunk, you shouldn't be legally allowed to carry a weapon. I think the .08% BAC should apply to CCW (I think it does in most states).

I know my limits for driving is two 16 oz beers, then I am at .08% and too drunk to drive. I am 5'9 and weigh 220 pounds. I have a high tolerance and don't feel drunk, but legally I am. Tolerance has nothing to do with how fast you get drunk. A drunk guy shooting another drunk guy in a bar is just one more argument for the anti gun folks to take them away.

As per the OP, if I owned a bar-I would ban firearms outright. Bars have too much liability as is-no need to add more. As a former bartender, if I saw someone carrying, I would serve them once, then not again until they got rid of the firearm as I could be held liable for their actions because I served them alcohol. It only came up twice. One guy left and did not return for the night, the other went back to his apartment, stowed the gun and came back.

I am sure that this will make some people on this forum mad, but I am not trying to be a troll. I am merely stating my MHO.

JHK94
July 1, 2009, 06:08 PM
Well, it looks like it passed. Hopefully the Gov. will get around to signing it soon.

I have to say, I'm really happy about this. One big reason is that I get around a lot by bicycle and walking, and it really stinks to be armed on your bike, run into some friends who are going to Denny's, and have to say no because you aren't allowed to carry there, and you choose not to drive everywhere to have a portable gun safe.

Maverick223
July 1, 2009, 06:39 PM
Denny's, and have to say no because you aren't allowed to carry thereWhen did Denny's start serving alcoholic beverages?

JHK94
July 1, 2009, 06:42 PM
Lots of Denny's serve beer. Sometimes its in a different room than the main dining area, but not always.

That's kind of the point though; there are a lot of places you would be surprised to find out serve alcohol!

Maverick223
July 1, 2009, 06:44 PM
Lots of Denny's serve beer.I didn't realize that, but I don't think they do in NC, but not entirely sure (not a place I frequent often). :)

JHK94
July 1, 2009, 06:48 PM
Totally. I don't know if it is regional or what, but I never saw one until I moved to Arizona, and I was pretty surprised.

youngda9
July 1, 2009, 07:27 PM
I have never tried to kill anyone while under the influence. We are allowed to carry in bars here in Indiana...no problems.

Only the criminals do bad with weapons...remember that.

Sam1911
July 2, 2009, 08:35 AM
I have gotten into too many fights with people in bars to think allowing firearms is a good idea.

Certainly, if this kind of statement applies to you, then carrying a weapon is right out the window.

If you've had "too many fights" in bars, then you clearly enter with the willing acceptance that you can, and will, participate in bar fights. Otherwise, once would have been enough -- you would avoid these bars entirely as the certainty of violence places you at too great a risk.


And, really, how irresponsible is it to say, "I'm going out drinking and there's a 25% chance I'll end up in a fight. Better leave my gun at home as that would make the whole thing too dangerous!" A fight is a life-and-death situation, whether you realize it or not. Going out to a local bar for a rumble is a very dangerous way to let off steam.

As many, many others have said, "never go anywhere with a gun that you wouldn't dare go WITHOUT a gun." I'd add, don't go into a dangerous spot WITHOUT a gun if you wouldn't go WITH one. A handgun is what you carry when you're NOT expecting trouble. If you ARE expecting trouble, DON'T GO.

This comes up from time to time and it never ceases to amaze me. Folks claim to be so devoted to their right to self-defense that they carry 24/7 and talk about being in "Condition Yellow" or "Condition Orange," but, come Saturday night, they'll not only disarm, but willingly enter a common location for violent interaction and publicly intoxicate themselves, thus lowering their awareness and reaction times.

What is the benefit? Is the lousy bar beer so great that you would willingly put yourself in harm's way? It's fine to say "one drunk shooting another" looks bad. But you sure look SMART sitting in the back of a police cruiser with a black eye and wondering how you're going to pay for the juke box the other guy destroyed with your head. Hey, at least I was RESPONSIBLE and didn't carry a gun in there!

Nice.


-Sam

larry_minn
July 2, 2009, 09:26 AM
`Far as I know MN is still legal to carry in bars. IIRC as long as I am UNDER .04back I am good. (as I don't drink its not a issue I watch) Otherwise I couldn't go out for chow at most local places. The food brings folks in the bar makes them money.
Heck the only thing I have EVER heard regards this (guns in bar) was before MN went to "shall issue" A gent in bar was being bothered by another. The local went outside and came back in as the "out of towner" was getting loud about what a coward the local was. Said local DID give him a chance to cool down (I am told he did NOT esculate) Well the out of towner got his fight. (I was told it was rather short) and the local went back to his drink. After the other guy left a friend of mine (who told me story) said he asked the local why he left. "I had to put my gun in my truck because I KNEW I would have to deck that guy sooner or later"
While the "smarter" move is to leave... It does stink that you are supposed to leave YOUR local bar becaue of a mouthy POS.

HarryB
July 14, 2009, 02:13 AM
S I G N E D!!!!

I am no longer a criminal at Olive Garden lunchtime salad and breadsticks--except for maybe having questionable choice of dining there...

armoredman
July 14, 2009, 02:57 AM
I didn't see it signed yet on ALIS or AZCDL.org, but I can hope so.

Morrell
July 14, 2009, 11:18 AM
I could care less about bars. What does matter for the average person is being able to walk into a O'Charley's, etc... And defend myself if needed.

CountGlockula
July 14, 2009, 12:26 PM
Governor hasn't signed yet.

MikkOwl
July 14, 2009, 01:53 PM
As long as the people who intake mind altering drugs are not having a firearm on them in establishments and places with people in them, it seems like a good idea to let the clear minded ones carry.

I could care less about bars.
This is one of the strangest phrasings among native English speakers. Somewhere along the road, people stopped questioning what they were saying literally and just repeated a saying they heard. What you just said is that you care about bars, because you can indeed care less about it than you do. :) I wonder when this kind of switch came along, because it's pretty common to see people make this mistake these days. The real phrasing is "I could NOT care less about.."

I have never tried to kill anyone while under the influence. We are allowed to carry in bars here in Indiana...no problems.
Only the criminals do bad with weapons...remember that.
What if you were not yourself? Mind altering substances can affect people in many ways. Humans are capable of the most unexpected things when not at their full senses.

psyopspec
July 14, 2009, 03:29 PM
And, really, how irresponsible is it to say, "I'm going out drinking and there's a 25% chance I'll end up in a fight. Better leave my gun at home as that would make the whole thing too dangerous!" A fight is a life-and-death situation, whether you realize it or not. Going out to a local bar for a rumble is a very dangerous way to let off steam.

Agreed. I'll only fight for training's sake in a semi controlled environment with a few ground rules. Outside of that environment, I'll treat any fight like the lives of me or mine depend on the outcome.

No reason Arizonians shouldn't be able to carry in bars. Even under Denver's draconian rules, it's allowed and I've never seen it become a problem. I don't drink while carrying a weapon or driving a car, or when either is in the immediate future. This policy has thus far served me well.

ArfinGreebly
July 14, 2009, 04:02 PM
We have some friends who come to town from time to time, and one of the spots we frequent when they do is Applebee's.

Applebee's is a restaurant whose central feature (physically central) is a horseshoe-shaped bar.

They serve the whole range of alcoholic beverages.

They are also a family restaurant.

I don't drink.

When we go there, our friends have a margarita or two. My wife might have a beer. I have hot tea (or coffee if they're out).

I've been dining at Applebee's across four states for more than ten years.

I have never once seen anyone get so blitzed they had to have a fight about it.

Under the "no guns in bars" rule, I would be compelled to be as disarmed as Suzanna Hupp (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzanna_Hupp) at Luby's Cafeteria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby%27s_massacre).

Happily, Idaho isn't that stupid.

CoRoMo
July 14, 2009, 04:05 PM
Drinkers have 2nd Amendment rights too.

armoredman
July 14, 2009, 04:47 PM
All pro rights bills in AZ signed, so nice to have a pro rights govenor for a "change".

HK G3
July 14, 2009, 05:20 PM
Do any fellow Arizonans know when these laws will take effect?

BossHaug
July 14, 2009, 07:05 PM
These pro-gun bills will take effect on September 30, 2009.

Lou McGopher
July 14, 2009, 08:12 PM
Alcohol -- especially just the presence of it nearby -- doesn't turn the CCW licensed citizen into a homicidal maniac. Nor does it make him/her a dangerous public menace.

It's a well-established fact that alcohol makes me a happier, more charming guy.

I think it also improves my dancing skills, but the jury is still out on that.

If anything, I'd be less likely to draw my weapon when under the influence of alcohol, as I am more likely to let my guard down. But that makes me less of a danger to others, and perhaps more of a danger to myself. I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't think I've ever gotten angry when drunk. Ever.

MikkOwl
July 14, 2009, 08:16 PM
A drug that impairs judgment, coordination, ability to control emotions, memory and restrict one's impulses, goes without saying that it does not mix publicly with operating deadly weapons (having them on your person, close enough).

Now clearly, we don't care what people do with their firearms and their drugs in the privacy of their own (or a friend's) home. But public establishments and interaction demands responsibility, just like motor vehicles on public roads do. Risktaking on other people's behalf is not ethically acceptable.

HarryB
July 14, 2009, 11:47 PM
FRAK FRAK FRAK

READ READ READ

These laws DO NOT allow you to consume if you carry! The allow you to carry in establishments that serve alcohol. For me, and many others, carrying into a restaurant was a criminal act because most successful establishments serve.

rainbowbob
July 15, 2009, 12:51 AM
Alcohol -- especially just the presence of it nearby -- doesn't turn the CCW licensed citizen into a homicidal maniac.


Precisely.

And just like most firearm restrictions, making bars "gun free" zones does nothing to prohibit homicidal maniacs from misusing a firearm in one.


I wonder what it would take to remove those restrictions here in Washington State?



...it does not mix publicly with operating deadly weapons (having them on your person, close enough).

Not close enough. I'm not "operating a deadly weapon" that remains in my pocket. I'm not more likely to "operate" it if I've had a beer.

And if I DO have to "operate" it - it's gonna be a bad day, whether or not I've had a beer.

armoredman
July 15, 2009, 01:29 AM
It's ALWAYS miscast as guns in bars, that's the leftists trash talking. I want to go to a sit down resteraunt without leaving my sidearm in the car, unattended, whie my wife, unarmed, enjoys a strwberry daquiri. I'll stick with coffee.

CAVMANROCKRDUDE
July 15, 2009, 02:05 AM
WELL..I'll tell you having just moved to Az. from northern Ca. where the criminals have just been walking into resturants at random and robbing everyone and the resturant while the state tries to make it hard for honest people to even own a gun moreless carry one( all this does is create a larger victim pool for them to feed on) I think Az. ought to be praised not questioned for their move give me a right to carry state... any place any where it always makes they bad guys think hard about their line of work......

armoredman
July 15, 2009, 02:18 AM
Welcome to AZ! :) Get your shall-issue permit and standard capacity magazines yet?

CAVMANROCKRDUDE
July 15, 2009, 02:28 AM
AZ ISN'T BEING KIND
I went to local gun store was refused a pistol and told to check back in a week at which time they said they recieved no reason they then sold me my gun and 2 weeks later I get this letter from the justice dept. saying they were coming to take my gun for a 33yr old pot charge(misdemeanor $250 fine) and they claimed it was a felony and asked me if I could prove otherwise...(guilty until proven innocent???)so I wrote to Ore. paid $20.00 for cetified copies of the case and then cotacted justice dept.again and they said wait until they conducted their own investigation,,,and when they finished they said I was not on Ore. no gun list(they even talked to ore. legal counsel)I then recieved letter from them saying they were closing case.gave me they nics number and a pamplet for appeal ...I have faxed $40.00 worth of of copies of the original letter the case closed letter(from the justice dept) and told them that I have carried a secret clearance from D.O.D for 7 years who did their own check and this issue never came up ...and they claimed the weren't allowed to talk to d.o.d...gee who would expect one agency to talk to another...(what was I thinking)....well $60.00 later and mucho paranoia I have yet to hear from nics appeal yet........now my livelyhood, my home protection my ability to go into desert(bought a snake gun) to get rocks(my hobby) I am a card carrying nra member have owned guns since I was sixteen am now 50+ and now I feel the govt. robbing me of my rights...any opinions of how to proceed from here to get this fixed sure would be helpful...

Mr. Bojangles
July 15, 2009, 04:38 AM
I wish I could help you, but I'm sure they have a fantastic reason (sarcastic voice) for harassing you while they can't keep pedophiles and muggers off the street. :banghead::cuss:

I agree that we all need to exercise discretion when we have been drinking. However, banning firearms just because there is alcohol around is absurd, and once again alienates law-abiding citizens (as many other similar silly laws do), allowing only criminals to carry guns.

armoredman
July 15, 2009, 08:57 AM
caveman, that isn't AZ, that's NICS, AZ has nothing to do with that. You were delayed, and after the three days waiting, it went to an automatic proceed. The government system is not the best updated. If you had an AZ CCW permit, you wouldn't be going through the constant NICS check, BTW.

MikkOwl
July 15, 2009, 10:08 AM
Not close enough. I'm not "operating a deadly weapon" that remains in my pocket. I'm not more likely to "operate" it if I've had a beer.
Good for you that you don't drink more than one beer and probably barely get affected. Never the less, it is common to see people get completely piss drunk in drinking establishments. Not everyone restricts themselves to one beer and have no bad reactions to alcohol.

It's ALWAYS miscast as guns in bars, that's the leftists trash talking. I want to go to a sit down resteraunt without leaving my sidearm in the car, unattended, whie my wife, unarmed, enjoys a strwberry daquiri. I'll stick with coffee.
Well, isn't it also about guns in bars, if bars are included in the law? With all this talk of restaurants it appears to me the law needs to be more detailed and discriminating about where it does and doesn't apply. I like the idea of guns in restaurants.

Mohawk
July 15, 2009, 12:12 PM
The new Az. Law that Brewer signed applies to all resturants and bars for CCW holders. They will not be allowed to legally drink alcohol while carrying. Bar owners can post a "No Guns Allowed". Our state organization has set up a 3 person committee to monitor all gun incidents in bars and resturants. We are worried about two things. 1. That if a person gets arrested in a bar for unlawful use of a firearm, be it brandishing or actual shooting, we want to seperate the ratio of legal CCW holders from those carrying illegally and report to the media. 2. If the LEOs start a shakedown of legal CCW holders in bars and use the act of legally carrying as a pretext to automatically check for alcohol content in a CCW carrier via breathalizer, blood or sniff test. This is something we would fight and consider unreasonable search.

The other gun related bills that were signed by Jan were as follows
1. Business owners must now allow gun owners to keep their weapons in their cars locked up while at work or doing business at the related establishment while in the company parking lot. (no more blanket restrictions on guns in your workplace parking lot)
2. The law has been amended to allow a person legally carrying a gun to announce that he has a weapon and intends to use it if a threat or self defense situation arises. Prior this was considered "Intimidation" or verbal brandishing and was illegal.
3. The law has been amended to make the 2006 ruling that the prosecution must prove it's case rather than the defense must prove justifiable shooting. This law has been made retroactive back to the Harold Fish case. Which means he will be released. The state has the option to retry the case but we don't think they will.

All in all, a good day for gun rights in Arizona.

rainbowbob
July 15, 2009, 12:44 PM
Good for you that you don't drink more than one beer and probably barely get affected. Never the less, it is common to see people get completely piss drunk in drinking establishments. Not everyone restricts themselves to one beer and have no bad reactions to alcohol.

I'm not more likely to "operate" my deadly weapon even if I'm "piss drunk".

Are you?

From what I've read of the experience of states where bar carry is allowed - drunks shooting off guns is not a problem.

You're worried about the drunks who do shoot guns in and around bars - and rightly so. But THOSE folks are the "homicidal maniacs" who are going to do bad things wherever they go - REGARDLESS of the law.

More legal restrictions for law-abiding citizens don't make us safer.

Period.

I would appreciate it if those who are all for more gun restrictions would provide one shred of credible evidence that less restrictions result in more criminal violence - or that more restrictions result in less criminal violence.

Put up, or....well let's keep it HighRoad.

armoredman
July 15, 2009, 12:50 PM
Hmm, been in bars many times over the years, and not everyone in sight got drunk. No, not by a long shot. Must be a Swedish thing. :) Just kidding, but really, over here, people sometimes go out for a drink, and that's it. Drunk driving laws are stiffer every year, and extreme DUIs get to meet me professionally. More and more people are using designated drivers, too, and there's the guy who should be carrying.
Seriously, it is a good thing, and I will be interetsed to see how many places put up signs.

MikkOwl
July 15, 2009, 01:53 PM
I'm not more likely to "operate" my deadly weapon even I'm "piss drunk". Are you?
I don't consume alcohol, and I WISH I could even have a deadly weapon to begin with! :) Laws here are hardcore anti-gun. Sports and hunting only, under strict licensing. I wrote a post about myself and gun views in this country, have a look here - http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=5755683&postcount=4084 (it's in the introduction).

I know what you are trying to say - you think you probably wouldn't ever be any more violent or reckless with firearms when under the influence of certain mind altering substances, and you may well be correct about that assumption, but not everyone is like you. People react varyingly to alcohol. People I know become aggressive and violent - thankfully most had the self-control and self-insight to simply stop drinking completely. Others don't have the insight or lack the self-control. They may abuse alcohol, suffer from varying degrees of mental illness (common). One acquintance suddenly attacked another friend after having had a dinner with some alcohol. He had started suffering from paranoia and I guess the alcohol made him unable to restrain his impulses to act on his unreasonable emotions. He believed his friend had tried to slight him during the dinner. Another friend's brothers (one of which is an alcoholic and cocaine addict, frequently hangs in bars and likes guns) had started hallucinating after a good bout of alcohol intake, seeing everyone around himself as aggressive, and he was going to 'defend' himself. Thankfully no one was hurt.



From what I've read of the experience of states where bar carry is allowed - drunks shooting off guns is not a problem.
You're worried about the drunks who do shoot guns in and around bars - and rightly so. But THOSE folks are the "homicidal maniacs" who are going to do bad things wherever they go - REGARDLESS of the law.
People are not merely either homicidal maniacs or law abiding citizens. Mind altering substances tend to change people's personalities, and in most of us it can make us do things we would not have done otherwise. People are complex and changing. Some are mentally unstable and may at some point or another be pushed over the edge, often in combination with mind alterning substances and personal setbacks. This despite otherwise wanting to be and mostly being stand-up good people. On another note, I am happy to hear that they think it's not a problem, however that may mean.

More legal restrictions for law-abiding citizens don't make us safer.
I want to make it clear that I like the idea of concealed carry, in public places. I generally agree with you, but what is 'law-abiding' depends on what the law happens to be at one time or another. Being not law-abiding if the laws are illogical and stupid is hardly unethical. It does make the person a criminal, but not all criminals are bad either.

I think you are wrong in your statement that restrictions exclusively never make anyone safer. There are many cases where that does help. There are endless amount of laws that regulate and restrict dangerous behaviour, materials, risky behaviours etc. A simple one would be prohibiting operating heavy machinery (including cars) under the influence of drugs that are likely to impair their ability to do so safely. One can be only of good intent, and go driving under the influence, and still end up with a very bad outcome.

I want to make it clear that I like concealed carry, especially in public (such as schools). And meanwhile I don't support mixing drugs and guns, in public. At home, ok. I do not think it is a problem to have people in public, even around other drunks, carrying concealed, as long as they refrain from consuming themselves. If the laws could somehow make the distinction (and I believe it even does? :) )

I would appreciate it if those who are all for more gun restrictions would provide one shred of credible evidence that less restrictions result in more criminal violence - or that more restrictions result in less criminal violence.
The general line of thinking, for me at least, is that when people cross the line and become aggressive and what not, for any reason, they'll use the weapons they have at their disposal. It is an impulsive act of passion, after all. Alcohol is well known to make some types of people much more aggressive than usual and impair their judgement. It is better to have them try to start trouble with a melee weapon or unarmed than with an autoloading firearm.

Hmm, been in bars many times over the years, and not everyone in sight got drunk. No, not by a long shot. Must be a Swedish thing. Just kidding, but really, over here, people sometimes go out for a drink, and that's it.
Getting piss drunk is a Swedish thing, you were right! Scandinavian thing actually.. Never the less, of course many just go past a pub, have a beer and get going. I'm not worried about those people. But how to seperate them from those who have more than a beer, who are severely depressed, perhaps narcissistic or feeling paranoid, and don't handle alcohol well?

One way could be to have the pubs decide for themselves what to do. They can invite everyone armed, and any customer comfortable with that can just step right in. No one is forced to attend bars. Or they can have whatever restrictions on firearms they feel like.

rainbowbob
July 15, 2009, 03:12 PM
I know what you are trying to say - you think you probably wouldn't ever be any more violent or reckless with firearms when under the influence of certain mind altering substances, and you may well be correct about that assumption, but not everyone is like you.

Actually, I don't believe you DO understand what I'm trying to say.

What I'm trying to say is I believe the overwhelming majority of people do NOT commit criminal violence under ANY circumstance - "piss drunk", or otherwise. Not just me.

And I believe those that DO commit criminal violence are going to do so regardless of any legal restrictions to the contrary.



I generally agree with you, but what is 'law-abiding' depends on what the law happens to be at one time or another.

OK...Let me have a do-over on that one in order to clarify:

More legal restrictions for non-violent citizens don't make us safer.
Clearer?

Again...if anyone can provide one iota of evidence that gun restrictions make us safer from criminal violence - please provide it.

I understand you are coming from one of those unfortunate countries that have banned guns entirely - and I truly feel sorry for you.

You must understand that we in the US do NOT want to end up like that. And every restriction that infringes the self-defense rights of non-violent citizens - while doing nothing at all to curb criminal violence - is a step in that direction.

Sam1911
July 15, 2009, 06:24 PM
many just go past a pub, have a beer and get going. I'm not worried about those people. But how to seperate them from those who have more than a beer, who are severely depressed, perhaps narcissistic or feeling paranoid, and don't handle alcohol well?

How do you separate the regular folks from those people who have more than a beer and want to crack someone's skull with a bar-stool or pool cue? Or go out to their car and get the gun they (legally) left outside and come back in and shoot up the place? Or commit any number of other violent acts? The answer is that you can't. If it's already illegal to assault someone or commit murder, how will adding a lesser charge of posessing a weapon in a prohibited location really be a signficant deterrant? That just doesn't make sense.

Say "Violent Joe" has had too many beers and he's mad at the world. He's been in a pushing match and exchanged insults with folks in the bar and he heads out to his car to get his gun and show them all who's boss. Now he's got murder in his eyes -- no body can push him around ANY MORE -- they're gonna DIE! But wait! What's that? The law says I can't bring the gun into the bar! Oh, shucks. Never mind. I was going to kill some folks, but bringing the gun into the bar would be illegal so I guess I cant.

Silly, isn't it?

The truth is that we just DON'T have a problem with this. As I've pointed out here before, in my state it is perfectly legal for me to enter any bar with a loaded gun on my hip, sit down and drink a beer or two. It is legal for any of the 650,000+ other PA citizens who hold a License To Carry Firearms to do the same. So, where are the corpses? Where are the hundreds of arrests of "piss drunk" folks who surely must be being incarcerated for violent altercations because they were armed and intoxicated? They just aren't there. They just don't happen.

Or, rather, they happen a lot LESS frequently among the legally armed citizens than they do among the illegally armed (repeat criminals, etc.) and the rest of the "general population."

So, really, what we see is that a LOT of folks go out to enjoy a drink. Some of those folks go armed. A very few of those folks (armed or not, no real way to know) get noticeably intoxicated while out for the evening. A very, VERY few of those folks (almost none of the legally armed ones) act violently. And those that act violently will do so with whatever weapon they have at hand -- and, if they are inclined to carry a gun, will do so whether the law allows it or not. After all, they're already violating FAR more serious mores than that!

Now, from my point of view, I do accept that it is possible that some folks, sometimes, do get incoherently intoxicated, and violent, when out drinking in public. I can't remember the last time I saw this (not even back in my college days) but I know it DOES happen. And let's say that I'd make a bad enough choice about the establishment I'm visiting, or just have the dumb luck to stumble into such a situation. The fact that the law could prohibit ME from being armed will be COLD comfort as some drunk tough guy is swinging a broken bottle (or pointing HIS GUN) at me and my family! No matter where I am nor what I've had to drink, the responsibility and the right to effectively defend myself and my loved ones belongs to me alone.

-Sam

rainbowbob
July 16, 2009, 02:05 AM
Silly, isn't it?


BINGO!

Great post,Sam.

We've heard the truth from Pennsylvania.

Congratulations, Arizona.

Kind of Blued
July 16, 2009, 03:25 AM
Harold Fish was RETROACTIVELY released with the flick of a pen?

That's fantastic. I'm off to check the Harold Fish thread in the other forum.

If you enjoyed reading about "Arizona moves to allow concealed guns in bars" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!