The CWP law states that the CWP law does not change Section 16-23-465, which is the law that those who claim it is illegal to carry in restaurants rely upon. Well, after talking with CWP holders who had CWPs prior to the shall issue CWP law being enacted, I was told by each of the CWP holders I talked with that prior to the shall issue CWP law being enacted, they were allowed to carry in restaurants that served alcoholic beverages. Hmmmm ...
So, if it was legal to carry in restaurants that serve alcoholic beverages prior to the shall issue CWP law being passed, and the shall issue CWP law stated that nothing changed Section 16-23-465, then why was it suddenly illegal to do so after passage of the shall issue CWP law?
I wrote an analysis of the law on this subject and submitted it to SLED in an effort to get SLED to interpret the law in a pro-gun fashion. Capt. Mark Keel read my analysis and when we talked, he stated that he could not find a flaw in the logic or the law. But, Keel was also unwilling to be the one responsible for changing the legal interpretation of the law. So, Keel sent the GrassRoots analysis to AG Condon. AG Condon decided that the GrassRoots analysis was wrong. You might enjoy reading both the GrassRoots analysis and the AG opinion.
That leaves us where we are now. Even if the GrassRoots interpretation is
correct, the fact that it has been decided that it is illegal to CWP carry in restaurants that serve alcoholic beverages for so many years would be controlling. So, what we might have won years ago on the merits, we have
absolutely lost by now due to passage of time.