GLOCKMEISTER

Sounds like your learned that one the hard way... lol

I like the RIA.... IMHO

this shouldnt be any different then the heller case... IMHO!

good luck.... you will run yourself ragged if your not careful!!!

it wont fly...

you have my number... I'll try and make it but wont know till in the morning. Next week looks good tho.

to answer the question as far as I can tell its all good to go for July 14th as the 1st day of carry.

see there you go and open mouth and insert foot... How many Democrats voted for the gun bills this session? Are you really trying to piss them all off right here in the moment when we might need them for some very important possible override vote? There are very strong 2nd amendment supporters on both sides of the isle. Dude, thats a sad point of view considering what we've gotten passed this session with their help. You might as well have said Chattanoogaians hate liberty....

i say quit playing with this guy... send the bill back up there with whatever changes are needed and lets see what happens. If he doesnt want to play nice lock up the budget or some of his other pet projects... he's supposed to be flying out to Germany in the morning.. he wont be here to fight it and he wont like that one bit.

BUT THERE ARE A WHOLE LOT OF PROGUN DEMS UP THERE THAT WE CAN COUNT ON, THE THING IS WE OUTNUMBER THEM... PERIOD. not yelling... Heres the latest and Im starting to feal like we got screwed.... Tennessee Firearms Association, Inc. Legislative Action Committee For those of you who are not a non-lobbyist walking and listening in the halls of the General Assembly today, wow, it has been a busy day. The word was received from Bredesen's Mount Olympus that he was unhappy with the parks bill which has been laying on his desk since June 1 (is he intentionally waiting for the last minute on these firearms bills?) because he does not like the idea of opening the local parks or making local governments vote to close them. Odd, that neither the governor nor his staff lobbyists have been raising these issues while the bill was in the committee system. It is also odd that his office has made statements to the effect that he was not offended by the parks bill because it did not involve alcohol). Yet, on the eve of the 10th day, governor Bredesen, a self proclaimed defender of the 2nd Amendment, drops a hint about a 2nd veto in 2 weeks. That sent the legislature scrambling. Could a compromise be found? Are there enough votes for an override - the 2nd of his administration? Is there enough time for an override? All of these questions had to be considered while at the same time the Senate GOP was busy with other legislation on perhaps more important issues - like reducing the governor's proposed budget which apparently sent him into a tantrum when he referred to the Senate GOP's actions as "stupid." Or is this "hint" some form of retaliation by the governor for last week's veto override? At this point we don't know the answers to some of these questions and we never. However, circumstantial evidence indicates that it is the General Assembly that is paying attention to the Constitutions of the State and the United States rather than the governor who seems to be using firearms issues as a negotiating point with the General Assembly. For example, news reports across the state earlier today are talking about a "compromise" between the General Assembly and the Governor on the parks bill and several other firearms related bills. Again, he could have been involved during the legislative hearings but choose to watch from Mt. Olympus - or is it Mt. Phil now - and see what they served him as a final product. However, some news reports later in the day are reporting that Bredesen denies the existence of a compromise. See, Tennessean Blog which reports this afternoon in an update: Update III: Bredesen told the Gaggle that he had made no such agreement on handguns. His account was that he was told, through an aide, that the sponsors of the bill wanted to clean up some of the language and had decided on their own to remove the local parks. He also said he had not agreed not to veto the clarifying language on guns-in-restaurants-that-serve-beer. Oh, Phil Bredesen is claiming that after 5 months of considering this bill and very little comment from him that the General Assembly decided there was an error in the bill and wanted it back? Oh yeah, that is credible. The Senate is in session and you have time now to email and call them. Let them know your position on this issue. Let them know, if need be, you will stand with them to again override an abusive veto should that be the outcome. Let them know you are listening, you are watching and you will not sit by quietly as constitutional rights are trampled from Mt. Olympus is a turf war.

but wasnt part of this deal done so we wouldnt have to face any more gun bill vetos?

why, I thought that was part of the backroom deal that he made for use giving up local parks... he wouldnt veto anything else gun wise?

what I cant understand for the life of me... is honestly with the republicans having mostly all the control.. why didnt we use something else as leverage on our gun stuff. I mean the budgets shot to hell... we coulda held all this up for a while. Theres all sorts of things that meant more to Bredesen than this. We didnt have to compromise on parks on this the last day he coulda vetoed it.. right?

nope they are working on giving up control of bi centennial park downtown which is a state park...

so come Jan... its on again baby!

thats what I have been saying all along.... But some thought we had the bite to get it all... but we simply didnt. This has been a great year for gun owners but Im not giving up yet.

looks like this thread is a mute point now....

Thats the way I see it... its kinda like buying Insurance.

hey... dont get me wrong Im as happy as an 18 year old boy at the playboy mansion... :D:D

hope so, but we gave them local parks without a fight... might be a smart move

thing is if we had written the bills with no loopholes we wouldnt be in this position in the 1st place. If the Govner wanted to veto it then we could have and we'd been in better shape.

in almost every true war against a strong opponent you will lose a skirmish or a battle... the important thing is you win the war.

supposed to be... but "supposed too's" doesnt mean they will.

but were worried about this one with people changing their minds... if you think back I wasnt worried at all on the other one...

yep...