The brutal attack at Bufords Backyard Beer Garden in Austin has exposed a dangerous contradiction in Texas law, where a state celebrated for its robust gun culture simultaneously disarms even licensed concealed carriers in precisely the kind of setting where they may be most needed for self-defense.
Texas is widely regarded as a bastion of Second Amendment freedoms, yet it enforces a 51 percent statute that bars lawful concealed carriers from entering any establishment that derives at least 51 percent of its revenue from alcohol sales while armed. According to Breitbart, this restriction effectively creates pockets of vulnerability in a state otherwise known for trusting its citizens with the responsibility that comes with firearm ownership.
The San Antonio Report explained the mechanics of the rule in stark terms. The 51 percent sign is a gun control sign established in 1993 to protect bar owners. When a restaurant or bar initially applies for a Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission license, those projecting higher alcohol sales will receive a red 51 percent sign. This informs gun owners that they may not carry a weapon into the establishment.
In practice, the law assumes that licensed, background-checked Texans cannot be trusted to exercise judgment with their firearms in a bar environment, even if they are not consuming alcohol. It treats the concealed carrier not as a potential first line of defense against evil, but as a liability to be kept outside at all costs.
The tragic events at Bufords underscore how this policy leaves innocent people exposed. Another thing the 51 percent gun control law does is guarantee patrons of a bar are sitting ducks. After all, the 51 percent law did not prevent a 53-year-old man in a Property of Allah hoodie from opening fire on Bufords patrons with two guns. And sadly, it did not prevent two people being killed and fourteen others wounded in the heinous attack.
The attacker is no longer available to answer for his motives, having been killed in an exchange of gunfire with responding officers. We cannot talk to the 53-year-old attacker, as he was killed in an exchange of gunfire with police. But if we could talk to him, it would be interesting to find out if he assumed attacking a bar in Texas meant he was going to be the only one with a gun.
That question is not merely hypothetical for those who study the intersection of gun policy and public safety. The Second Amendment Foundations Kostas Moros observed, I would not be surprised if the terrorist chose a bar as his target for exactly this reason. Not that many places ban guns in Texas, and he just happened to pick one of the few types of places that did. His point highlights a recurring pattern: so-called gun-free zones often function as criminal-safety zones, where only the law-abiding disarm.
Supporters of the current framework have praised the Austin Police Department for its rapid reaction. People praise the fact that Austin Police Department officers arrived on the scene in 57 seconds to confront the attacker (and ultimately eliminate him, as noted above). However, if there had been a concealed carrier, or perhaps two or three, in the bar or on the bars patio when the attack commenced, an armed response could have occurred 55 or 56 seconds faster than the police response ended up taking.
For those who have worn the badge, the gap between seconds and minutes is not an abstraction but a matter of life and death. Gun Owners of Americas southeast regional director Luis Valdes pointed out, As a former cop, I commend APD on their quick response. But lets be real. When seconds count, cops are minutes away. Texas must repeal these gun-free zones. Congress must pass National Carry Reciprocity. Americans must be able to defend themselves.
Conservatives in Texas have long championed the right to keep and bear arms, and Republican leaders have generally stood firm against the lefts push for broader disarmament. Gov. Greg Abbott (R) has been a stalwart for the Second Amendment in Texas, as have many Republican lawmakers in the state. But somehow, a law remains on the books that puts the law-abiding citizen at a distinct disadvantage when a determined attacker ignores the gun-free statute and shows up loaded for bear.
The lesson from Bufords is not that Texas is too free, but that it is not free enough where it matters most. Texas needs to abolish the 51 percent law now. Concealed carriers are among the most law-abiding of citizens and they can be trusted to be responsible with their freedom.
As the debate continues, the core issue is whether the state will trust its own citizens more than it trusts a sign on a door. The horror in Austin demonstrates that a red 51 percent placard cannot stop a killer, but an armed, responsible Texan might.
Login