Can someone please explain what I am missing in understanding the highlighted statement. Isn't a liquors store main business the sale of alcoholic beverages? I didn't see anything about it being consumed or not. Again, not trying to stir the pot, just want to be comfortable in my reply if I get called out carrying into a liquor store too. Thanks.
A. It shall be unlawful for any person to carry or possess any weapon designated in Section 1272 of this title in any
establishment where low-point beer, as defined by Section 163.2 of Title 37 of the Oklahoma Statutes, or
alcoholic beverages, as defined by Section 506 of Title 37 of the Oklahoma Statutes, are consumed.
Thanks Gabriel. However I am still a little confused, and hopefully you can help me out. In the statement posted by the OP it states as you noted you can't carry a gun where alcohol is consumed. There are then a few periods and commas, which I would think separates the two statements and all it says is alcohol sales cannot be their primary business if you want to carry. So how are you saying the consumed part ties into the statement I was asking about. I'm afraid I'm reading to much into this, and probably just missing the bigger picture. Hopefully you guys can enlighten me some more.
My Favorite Liquor store knows I'm a gun enthusiast. One of the clerks keeps reminding me to let her know when our Women On Target Program happens at the range again.
I'd go back and educate the owner so that person could educate the employees. Something for him to put on the bulletin board would make it easy for him to accomplish this.
I'd go back and educate the owner so that person could educate the employees. Something for him to put on the bulletin board would make it easy for him to accomplish this.
Removed legal references and associated commas as all they were doing was referring to legal definitions in different parts of the Oklahoma statutes and I also snipped out the part about peace officers and private investigators. First paragraph states the prohibition of carrying in liquor/beer serving, as in for consumption, establishments and the second paragraph carves an exemption for places that are not setup to serve liquor and beer as their primary business purpose. Examples of the latter exempted places would be Chili's, Louie's, or other restaurants that's primary business purpose is serving food.
ETA: The second paragraph includes a part that says, 'other establishment licensed to dispense low-point beer or alcoholic beverages' and in this case, as I understand it from browsing the rest of Title 37 of the statutes, dispense means to pour from one vessel to another, like a keg tap into a pint glass or a bottle of liquor into a shot glass. This would rule out a liquor store since they sell but don't dispense or serve.
ETA: The second paragraph includes a part that says, 'other establishment licensed to dispense low-point beer or alcoholic beverages' and in this case, as I understand it from browsing the rest of Title 37 of the statutes, dispense means to pour from one vessel to another, like a keg tap into a pint glass or a bottle of liquor into a shot glass. This would rule out a liquor store since they sell but don't dispense or serve.
Last edited:
Leave it to law makers to say everything in a round about way. They could have just summed it up by saying something like "any business whose primary purpose is to sell alcohol for consumption on the premises."
This one gets my vote also.
Some folks do change. I've had several discussions with owners about their stance and educated them.
Some have changed their opinions
Some have not.
Most consistent comment I have gotten is "I didn't know that" or "I never thought of it that way".
Especially when discussing what it takes to get the license and what that immediately tells them about my criminal background (or lack of it.)
Dave
My thoughts also....."Didn't mean to question you and it got me to thinking...etc etc"
But honestly I doubt it will change his mind...he probably already knows everything.
I had the same type of discussion with a tulsa metro LEO, he was positive that you can't carry if there was a gun buster sign in the window. My attempt at discussing it was met with "i know i'm right"
Oh well, I'm sure unless his superior or a memo came out, his opinion isn't going to change.
Glad I didn't stop in ur liquor store tonite when in B'ville!
DNO
But honestly I doubt it will change his mind...he probably already knows everything.
I had the same type of discussion with a tulsa metro LEO, he was positive that you can't carry if there was a gun buster sign in the window. My attempt at discussing it was met with "i know i'm right"
Oh well, I'm sure unless his superior or a memo came out, his opinion isn't going to change.
Glad I didn't stop in ur liquor store tonite when in B'ville!
DNO
That made me LOL....
I would think it would all depend on the delivery of the information. If you went in acting just as arrogant and hot headed as he sounded as to being, it's just going to be a rinse and repeat as he will have already written you off.
If you went in slightly apologetic (even though you did nothing wrong, it's a psychology tactic), and told him that your conversation with him caused you to doubt yourself so you wanted to verify your information, and share your findings with him, he "may" be more perceptive to the information you have to share with him.
I don't think it would be a waste of time though. Everyone deserves the benefit of doubt at least once.
I would absolutely show the guy and his boss the law and educate them. It's not just you but every person carrying legally who go into a liquor store that doesn't have a sign. It is NOT illegal to carry into a liquor store in no way, no fashion...it's just not. Any restaurant or establishment where the the majority of the business is selling liquor drank on the premises i.e. bar/club it is not legal. It's really not that hard to understand.
Educate them
Educate them
Similar threads
