dawgdoc

My own research meshes with the links in DaveTN's links.  Basically, if a state agency asks for a SSN, they are supposed to tell you whether it is voluntary or required, and tell you what they do with it, and what law gives them the authority.  Apparently tax authorities are required to request your SSN as proof of who you are, but they are still supposed to give the referenced information.  At a minimum, the state has failed to do that.

I have question that maybe some of y'all might be familiar with.  Namely, what laws govern whether the state of Tennessee can require a Social Security Number?   Here are the specifics:  I hold a Tennessee veterinary license.  I, along with several thousand other people of various licensed occupations in Tennessee, must pay a $400 privilege tax to the state each June.  This is different from the license fee.  Last year, the state required everyone to file the tax online with no other option to pay.  They also made it so that you could given them checking account information and pay $400, or use a credit card and pay an additional 2.49%.     This year, as I went to pay the onerous tax, the webform asked for my SSN in addition to name, address, license number, etc.  It would not take the information without the SSN.  The state already has my SSN on file with various other personal information, so I do not see why they would need it again.  It seems like they should just be able to use the license number, since that is unique to each licensee.  I tried leaving the form blank, using all zeroes, X's, etc, but it won't accept it.  I take that to mean that they already have the number.   I'm more than a little leery of putting my SSN into some government computer that doesn't really need it, and also associating my checking account with that information.  To add to my unease, here is a quote from their Privacy Statement:       So is there some law somewhere that would prohibit the Department of Revenue from requiring my SSN for this particular function?  I have a vague notion about a law somewhere that SSN are only to be used by either the SS Administration or the federal government in general, but that could be some urban legend.  I know that is not actually the reality, since everyone asks for it.   I realize at this point that there is nothing I can do about it, since the tax is due June 1, but if anyone can offer any ammunition to use when I try to contact the dipwads in charge, I would appreciate it.  At this point it is the principal.  Maybe I am paranoid, but I would rather limit the number of online places to which I give my number (preferably 0).  

I went to today; it is truly a magical place.  Possibly more ammo than I have seen at any of the other big box outdoor store; definitely more brands than I have ever seen before.  They seemed to have a lot of reloading supplies.  Less guns than the Gander Mountain stores to which I have been.  I was disappointed that they didn't have full-size 1911 9mm magazines, but so far I have only found those online.  I was surprised that they didn't have more holsters.  Some of the clothing looked nice, but it will look nicer when it is on sale.   My wife found some fit-over shooting glasses that she liked; anything that will get her to come shooting more is a bonus.  I bought a variety of ammo.   My county will appreciate the sales tax revenue, so everyone come visit.  

The closest phrase that I can find is in 39-13-1351, which states, "a permit...shall entitle the permit holder to carry any handgun or handguns that the permit holder legally owns or possesses." So the code prohibits any carry with intent to go armed (and doesn't distinguish between OC or CC), and the permit gives you the defense against that law (and dosn't distinguish between OC and CC).

Sounds like that is what they want, a chilling effect on the your ability to carry. If a few people who don't know the actual law decide not to carry, then the other side has won.. If we don't follow the law, we get fined or jailed. If a large enough group, private or government, does not follow the law, nothing happens except maybe eventually they have to pay legal costs in a lawsuit.

So far, from what I have read, the shooter, who was not GZ, may be stalking him.  He has already accused GZ of road rage before, which apparently wasn't true.  The headlines make it sound like GZ shot at someone, but it looks like the opposite is true.  The police have said that GZ didn't shoot at anyone.   There is a picture of GZ's truck with a dark-tinted passenger window with a bullet hole in it; it doesn't seem believable that GZ supposedly waved a gun at the other driver, then rolled up his window, and then the shooter shot at GZ because he felt threatened at that point.  Sounds like a guy who shot at GZ and then concocted a story that he knew people wanted to believe.

Laws don't allow things, they make them illegal.  A simple way to put it is that everything is legal until a law makes it illegal (prohibited).  Therefore you won't find a phrase that open carry is "allowed."  You also won't find a phrase that open carry of a handgun with a valid permit is prohibited, either.  Therefore it is legal.   That is my simple view of the matter.

Not that I'm going, but I sent them an e-mail explaining the change in the law.  I agree with LagerHead that they could mistakenly think they have the power to ban weapons, but I composed a well-worded message explaining why they cannot.  We'll see how they respond.

Drove by today at 8 pm and the parking lot was full.  I thought I could see people, including children, entering or leaving the store.

I have worked at both a science museum and a wildlife center, and I often catch any snake I see. As a result, I have handled dozens of species, most native to the southeast. I never smelled cucumbers. I have been musked several times, and snake feces can be pretty foul when fresh, but I don't remember anything like cucumbers.

Georgia has much more specific laws regarding this very issue, and we still have festivals and other events that think they can ban guns when they rent a public park.  The law is pretty clear, but apparently at least one judge cannot understand it, because he ruled in favor of an airshow that banned guns where they had no authority to do so.   The basic question in all of these cases (private or paid event at a public park) is whether government can transfer a power that it does not itself possess?  If the KKK leased a park, could they make it "whites only" for the duration of their rally?  Could any event limit attendance to women only, or beautiful people only?  Just because a group rents public property, does not mean it becomes their own little state; they must still abide by the actual laws that govern it.   In Georgia, the law seems pretty clear, but just in case, more specific language was added to a bill sitting on the governor's desk right that makes even more clear.   I agree with the above sentiment that only successful lawsuits will force these events to follow the law.  Maybe when the first one or two gets burned, the rest will follow suit.  I always tell anyone who will listen that if we, the people, give anyone (government, organizations, neighborhood associations, etc.) the power to ban anything, they will almost inevitably do so.

Hammer285,   Have you read "Lucifer's Hammer?"  It's about a comet that hits the Earth and the resulting TEOTWAWKI scenario.  There is one character, an overweight scientist, who sees what is coming and shows up at one of the surviving communities with knowledge on how to make insulin, as well as other knowledge learned from Foxfire books.  He says something to the effect of, "All I need is one sheep a month."  From what I know, making insulin is doable, but I'm sure it is complicated (extracting it from animal pancreases) and something that one might learn before they needed it.

Like being the one guy with a pickup that everyone needs to help move stuff. X100.

The priest at my church* said that they only trust in Jesus for protection, but should any unfortunate event happen, the local PD is right down the road.  It was comforting knowing that our fine LEOs with guns could be trusted to come take statements and zip up body bags should some ISIS-inspired lone-wolf terrorist decide to go kill some Christians.  One or two 30-round magazines would be enough to accommodate the terrorist's wishes for everyone in church, and it is a relatively small nave.  My view is that God gave us the reasoning skills and tools to protect ourselves.  We should pray to Jesus that our hands are steady and our aim is true.   *I still consider it my church; I'm just waiting for state law to change or for them to see the light.  Maybe next year on the state law change.  Technically, some lawyers say that I could carry a .17 HMR revolver to the church because Georgia law does not consider a firearm with a caliber smaller than 0.46 cm that discharges a single shot to be a "handgun."  However, the "discharges a single shot" seems to have different interpretations by different people--i.e., shooting more than one projectile at a time vs. being able to hold more than one projectile in the gun at one time, so so far I have not been tempted (also, I haven't seen a .17 HMR handgun).  

Up until last year, it was completely illegal to carry in a church in Georgia. The law changed so that you could carry with permission of the church authority. There was no definition as to who is the authority, how to obtain permission, etc. The original bill just removed churches from the prohibited places list, but Senate Republicans inserted this permission language at the last minute using some shady procedures. So in some Georgia churches, the pastor may be all that is needed to grant permission to carry. In other denominations, one person can remove that option for thousands of their flock. Case in point, the Catholic Archbishop in Atlanta and the two Episcopal Bishops who control 99% of Georgia Episcopal churches decreed that guns were banned from all of their churches. No signs needed, just the ability to hide behind the skirts of the government. My Episcopal church is ruled by the Bishop of East Tennessee. I expressly asked permssion in a logical, well-constructed letter. He let the priest and the vestry decide, but he implied that he would ban guns if they didn't reach the right decision. They made their decision without asking mine or anyone else's opinion. This is still a sore point for me, and I haven't been back. The crazy thing is that I could go to any Chattanooga Episcopal church while carrying (as long as it is not posted), but if I carry in this church in the same diocese but different state, then I would violate the law. The penalty was also changed to a $100 fine and no arrest. Some of us would consider this an acceptable risk (a carry tax) except that a violation could make you ineligible to hold a weapons license for five years.

  I think this should seriously be considered.  Since they have used fiscal notes in the past to torpedo similar bills, we should think them for passing this law by completely eliminating the burden of maintaining or removing the signs.  Basically, a few volunteers with a step ladder and wrenches could remove the signs and graciously leave the posts for these municipalities to post whatever other signs they want.  They wouldn't have to spend one cent on employee hours to do anything with signs anymore.     If the municipalities refuse, then it would indicate that they don't really care about the cost associated with sign removal, but they do care for the confusion and doubt the signs might cause to legal carriers.

I considered sending "Day of Wrath" to each member of my school board ( who have refused to authorize school carry, which they have the power to do under state law), but I figure someone would take it as a threat. I told my wife that it is horrifying, but every parent should read it, and now she is. I have a small issue with the author. In both ths book and "One Second After," he mentions when a group of citizens band together that there were a variety of guns, including illegal machine guns. Now I understand that the narrator is omniscient, but he could have just as easily called them rare but legal machine guns. Also, he doesn't name the gun as an LCP, but it sems obvoius that is one,mup until the slide locks back on empty. A minor quibble.

On the webpage for the Governor's office, go to the contact button. There are a bunch of icons (Facebook , Twitter, etc.) which also has an envelope icon. That icon is the email link. I emailed him as a Georgia resident who avoids Tennessee because of the patchwork of gun-free zones like the parks in question.

I talked with a Marlin rep at the NRA meeting; he gave me his number so he could look up about the 70 HC.  He confirmed that it does not have an auto last-round hold open feature.  He also told me it was manufactured in 1988, and it was most similar to a Model 995.  He seemed real nice at the show; he was very helpful about finding information about an apparently no longer manufactured gun.

I remember getting somehing in the mail at that age. There was a card that I sent back, I think. As a father, I hope in 9 years that when that time comes for my son, it will be a "meh" moment rather than one of trepidation. I read an article about ISIS that basically said that they would like to goad he West into a war that ends with the Muslim version of Armageddon.

I noticed probably 4 or 5 OC'ers today and 3 or 4 yesterday.  I thought the Sig Sauer guy doing a concealed carry demonstration was a little over the top about concealing (he seemed to think any evidence of a gun was bad), but maybe he comes from a state where even printing is illegal.  Based only on my own observation that many people in the US refer to various states' licenses and permits as "concealed carry permits", is it correct to assume that TN and Georgia are in the minority in that they make no distinction between the two?

You can actually buy guns at the convention? I'm assuming you have to transfer through a FFL at a later date? And are all the manufacturers doing this?

I saw one place on Broadway with a Gadsden flag hung from the balcony, a "Welcome NRA" sign on the door, and a gun buster. I took a picture but can't post it now.

I loved being able to hold so many different guns without any sales pressure. I now want a revolver of some kind; it was real hard for me to feel much difference between similar sizes. My wife managed to make the cylinder fall out of a Taurus revolver. Also, I had never held a Beretta M9 before today; how does anyone get used to that safety? The Taurus clone seemed much more logical.

Pulse rifle from Aliens?