Can you CC in a CFZ with owners permission?

TheQ said:

You are right. .08 makes it "automatic", but you could be .01 and found to be "under the influence" -- with the right jury.

Officer: He appeared a bit wobbly as he walked.

Click to expand...

Also under the influence can any number of things. For instance if you take something "over the counter" that "could" make you drowsy and you were to get in a car accident then you could get charged with a crime, regardless if it was a cause of the accident or not. Then you have to get it dealt with in a court, which may or may not believe you. I was a passenger in my friends car when he accidently rear-ended a car, cops came he got out and was doing the info-exchange thing when the cop asked if he had a cold. My friend said yes and said he had taken some nyquil for the sneezing runny nose. We got back in the car and were about to leave when the cop and his SGT came back and asked my friend to get out of the car when he did he was arrested for DUI Driving Under the Influence. He beat the charge, jury trial BTW because he had bought the non-drowsy type and I was when he took it and bought it and he had the stores time/dated reciept. He spent the weekend in jail and had a final cost of close to 10,000 for legal fees and other costs. This was many years ago but kinda reinforces the old saying "don't talk to police". I have to admit though none of the dialouge sounded like a interrogation, it was just a conversation between 2 people. But not for the cop, he new where he wanted to go and fished out the answer he was looking for.

DrTodd said:

This is not as silly as it sounds. I think it could be arguably allowed.

Click to expand...

Maybe but unless the person signing the contract was my own kid there is zero chance I would ever sign that type of document. There are to many fingers in that jar for me to ever feel 100% safe from liabillity. Workers comp, my insureance company, tax issues, thing that would even happen that my "kid" wouldn't complain/make issue over. The list goes on,,,,

However I would just place a sign at all entrances that stated.

"ALL LEGAL FIREARM TYPES OF CARRY IS ALLOWED ON/AT THIS ESTABLISHMENT. OPEN/CONCEALED CARRY, AND NON CPL HOLDERS ARE ALLOWED/ WELCOME HERE.

Bronson said:

If I were a bar owner I would never put my signature on something like that.

Bronson

Click to expand...

See above,

NHCGRPR45 said:

Maybe but unless the person signing the contract was my own kid there is zero chance I would ever sign that type of document.

Click to expand...

Ding ding ding...we have a winner.

I don't see any business owner commiting their signature to anything like that.

Bronson

Bronson said:

Ding ding ding...we have a winner.

I don't see any business owner commiting their signature to anything like that.

Bronson

Click to expand...

I don't either, but there is no harm in trying. The question as posed was not whether an owner would be wise for signing a contract to allow concealed carry, rather it was: IF such a contract were developed, could it possibly meet the requirements contained in the exception? I think it just might, but I would definitely run it by an attorney.

NHCGRPR45 said:

However I would just place a sign at all entrances that stated.

"ALL LEGAL FIREARM TYPES OF CARRY IS ALLOWED ON/AT THIS ESTABLISHMENT. OPEN/CONCEALED CARRY, AND NON CPL HOLDERS ARE ALLOWED/ WELCOME HERE.

Click to expand...

How could this be used to support an argument that CC is being done under the "employee" exception? Those without a cpl who think it's "OK" to carry at your bar could still be cited for violating MCL 750.234d, your wishes notwithstanding. The state is enforcing that part of the law... and it applies even if the owner prefers that people CC rather than OC.

If I were the owner, I'd just post a sign: The primary source of income of this business is NOT the sale of alcoholic liquor by the glass and consumed on the premises. Or, I'd just write a letter to the OP stating the same. This way, any CPL holder who knows the law could carry and those who don't know the law are none the wiser.
Whether alcohol is or isn't the primary source of income, having a sign stating that it is not would reduce the likelihood of there being any issues. In fact, I really don't know how a prosecutor would even go about proving that the sale of alcohol is the primary source of the business...