GLOCKMEISTER

its not going to matter. She will be driving the car, thus most any interaction received from law enforcment would be directed against her. She's in possession of the gun, so again it wouldnt effect him. The PO shouldnt even know if there was a problem, she'd be the one the problem would be with. Its up to the officer's discretion to determine these matters anyway. In short parole officers are NOT POLICE OFFICERS!!!! They dont know the laws, they simply go by what they have been told or whats in a manual. ArM her and tell him not to be flippin the PIGS a BIRD! Everything will be fine.

sounds like it... cool.

Tennessee House passes handguns in bars bill | www.tennessean.com | The Tennessean Tennessee House passes handguns in bars bill By Erik Schelzig • ASSOCIATED PRESS • May 8, 2009 The House voted Thursday to allow Tennessee handgun carry permit holders to bring their weapons into any establishment that serves alcohol. The chamber voted 66-23 to approve the bill sponsored by Republican Rep. Curry Todd of Collierville, a retired police officer. The measure abandons earlier efforts to impose an 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. curfew for carrying handguns where alcohol is served and to keep a total ban on establishments that enforce age-restricted entry. "This is a brand new bill," Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. Mike Turner told the bill's sponsor, Curry Todd, who switched to his support to the Senate version. "In the House, we never talked about guns in bars. We talked about guns in restaurants. We've essentially got a whole new bill. We've never debated on this bill. I think this is a bit mischievous on your part." Todd said he agreed to support the curfew and age restrictions only as long as the bill was in the House. Once the Senate passed a version without that language, his promise was fulfilled. In March, Todd strenuously opposed efforts to strip the curfew from the bill and told reporters he wouldn't vote for a bill without the time limits in it. But the Senate passed the proposal without the restrictions, and the House negotiating panel led by Todd agreed to that version last week. Todd told the chamber that he considered the changes "minor." Proponents of the curfew said they wanted handgun carry rights to extend to family restaurants that also happen to serve alcohol. The 11 p.m. curfew was meant to differentiate those restaurants from bars, since Tennessee law doesn't distinguish between the two.

I swear I merged these two threads togather... something happened... again sorry I will post the Tn articla and you guys can post about it.

Im experiencing tech difficulties... Im trying to get it fixed...

This has been well covered TO DEATH... literally in another thread... http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/political-issues/20611-hb0962-restaurant-carry-41.html For the sake of the board Im going to give it a bit and see if it takes off hear, which is fine with me if not I'll merge the threads.

Well we may never have all the grey areas explained.... In any event I want to thank all the Representatives and Senators that were involved in getting this legislation passed, its been a long time coming. I also want to thank John Harris and the TFA... anyone whos been around the firearms industry for the past 15 years realizes John our true champion when it comes to gun rights. We wouldnt have a HCP law we have right now if it wasnt for his work. I'd also like to thank all the private citizens that took time to contact your legislature... those efforts made a difference. But remember the fight for our constitutional freedoms never stops.

our wholesale cost on the last 380 we got in... which was this week was $25 a box... now thats my cost on it... btw its all gone.

we really need John Harris to chime in and clear this up...

your funny Steve... I changed it back... I do bow to your Super Mod :bowrofl:abilitys...

I was just messin with ya... I think most people see it the same or think there is no restrictions... and until John has time to look at the fine print we may not know for a while.

you would die if I merged the threads wouldnt ya... hehehehe

so Fall what do you think this mean for places that serve alcohol for onsite consumption thats not a part of Beavers Senate amendment that defines a restaurant?

rarely as I would be I would be too....

I still dont think you are going to be able to carry in a place that sells alcohol thats not a business thats primary reason for being is to serve food... meaning a "bar"... I mean its too grey for me, or maybe Im looking at it too hard. I honestly think what we need is when John Harris has time to step in and chime in on what we have when its all said and done. He's probably the only one that can sift through all this correctly.

yea they got what they wanted, that was too keep the guns out of "bars"... the other issue that was part of the "age restriction" was the strip clubs. They really didnt want folks carrying in there either.

It depends on where you are. I own a bar here in Nashville, and lease it out. We have a liquor license and a beer license. We also have to sell food per Metro so were licensed thru the health dept as well. I think thats it. Btw, I wasnt trying to be argumentative earlier.. but I was told they were adding stuff to keep the bars clear. I assumed it was an age restriction.

there ya go...

I see what he's saying... but man its way to much of a grey area for me.

ok, finally i see where you are coming from. It sounds like an arrest waiting to happen though. Sorry to be so negative... I guess im just being cautious... this has been a long time coming.

read the senate ammendment.... thats where I screwed up earlier... I didnt recently. I knew something had been up, but was so busy I hadnt taken time this week to stay on it.

I stand corrected.... But Beavers ammendment isnt "clean".... I dont care and im happy as a pig in shiet... but Now they way I understand it they did away with the age restriction but added the difference in restaurants and bars? So in short you still cant carry in a bar? Right?

maybe im wrong... let me take the time to see.

yep... I'm pretty sure Im right the conference commitee report was all they voted on... and it contained a Senate ammendmnet to add the age restriction. Sorry to burst some bubbles.

heres where im coming from... not trying to be negative... and again I hope im wrong.. but here it is... *HB 0962 by *Todd, McCord, Tindell, Evans, Fincher, Watson, Faulkner, Eldridge, Rowland, McCormick, Bass, Hackworth, Cobb C, Carr, Matheny, Mumpower, Floyd, Bell, Lollar, Casada, Rich, Lynn, Harrison, Shipley, Dean, Johnson C, Johnson P, Niceley, Tidwell, Shepard, Hill, Ramsey, Halford, Haynes, Swafford, Maggart, Hensley, West, Montgomery, Dennis, Brooks H, Matlock, Dunn, Hawk, Lundberg, Weaver, Roach, Ford , Moore, Fraley, Campfield. (SB 1127 by *Jackson, Norris, Gresham.) Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, allows person with handgun carry permit to carry in restaurants that serve alcoholic beverages as long as such person is not consuming alcoholic beverages and such restaurant is not an age-restricted venue. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17. Fiscal Summary Decrease Local Revenue - Not Significant Decrease Local Expenditures - Not Significant Bill Summary Under present law, it is a Class A misdemeanor for a person to possess a firearm within the confines of a building open to the public where alcoholic beverages are served for on premises consumption. The following persons are exempt from the prohibition against carrying a firearm where alcoholic beverages are served for on premises consumption: (1) Anyone in the actual discharge of official duties as a law enforcement officer, or employed in the U.S. armed forces or any member of the Tennessee national guard in the line of duty and pursuant to military regulations, or in the actual discharge of duties as a correctional officer employed by a penal institution; and (2) Anyone on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control or who is the employee or agent of the owner of the premises with responsibility for protecting persons or property. This bill adds another exemption to the prohibition against carrying a firearm where alcoholic beverages are served for on premises consumption for any person who meets the following conditions: (1) The person has a handgun carry permit; (2) The person is not consuming any alcoholic beverage; and (3) The person is in an establishment that is open to the public, serves alcoholic beverages, wine or beer and is not an establishment that restricts admission to persons who are age 21 years or older by checking patrons' identifications. The present law authorization for any person to prohibit the possession of weapons by any person having a handgun carry permit on property owned, operated, or managed or under the control of the person by posting notice of the prohibition would apply to establishments that are affected by this bill. ON MARCH 30, 2009, THE HOUSE ADOPTED AMENDMENT #1 AND RESET HOUSE BILL 962, AS AMENDED. AMENDMENT #1 revises the provision whereby this bill applies only if the establishment is not a venue restricted to persons age 21 or older to instead specify that the authorization does not apply: (1) At such times the restaurant is age-restricted to persons age 18 or older; and (2) Between the hours of 11:00p.m. and 5:00 a.m. ON APRIL 6, 2009, THE HOUSE FURTHER CONSIDERED HOUSE BILL 962, AS AMENDED BY HOUSE AMENDMENT #1, AND PASSED HOUSE BILL 962, AS AMENDED. ON APRIL 16, 2009, THE SENATE SUBSTITUTED HOUSE BILL 962 FOR SENATE BILL 1127, ADOPTED AMENDMENT #1, AND PASSED HOUSE BILL 962, AS AMENDED. AMENDMENT #1 removes the provisions of House Amendment #1 and thus reinstates the provisions of the original bill. This amendment also revises the original bill to remove the requirement that the restaurant not be an age-restricted venue in order for a person who has a handgun carry permit and otherwise complies with the bill to carry a handgun into the restaurant. ON APRIL 23, 2009, THE HOUSE NON-CONCURRED IN SENATE AMENDMENT #1. ON APRIL 27, 2009, THE SENATE REFUSED TO RECEDE IN ITS ADOPTION OF SENATE AMENDMENT #1. ON APRIL 30, 2009, THE HOUSE REFUSED TO RECEDE IN ITS NON-CONCURRENCE OF SENATE AMENDMENT #1. A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE WAS APPOINTED. ON APRIL 30, 2009, THE SENATE APPOINTED A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE. ON MAY 4, 2009, THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE MET AND ADOPTED A MAJORITY REPORT. THE MAJORITY REPORT RECOMMENDS THAT HOUSE AMENDMENT #1 BE DELETED AND THAT SENATE AMENDMENT #1 (AS DESCRIBED ABOVE) BE ADOPTED. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- all can be seen right here... Tennessee General Assembly Legislation