JAB

Yes, currently you do have to have an HCP to legally have a loaded firearm in your vehicle. I simply disagree with that. If your car is your domain just like your house and you don't need an HCP to have a loaded firearm in your house then why should you need one to have a loaded firearm in your vehicle? Otherwise, the very idea that your car - being your property - is a protected, personal area makes no sense.

Me and mine. I have an HCP so that I can be legally equipped to defend myself and loved ones if the need arises. The purpose of that is to increase the chance that me and mine can go home at the end of the day and continue to live our lives as happily as possible. Getting involved in a gunfight in defense of a stranger - and risking getting injured or killed in said stranger's defense - runs counter to that purpose. Shooting someone in defense of said stranger - and risking legal issues and/or a civil case - on that stranger's behalf also runs counter to that purpose. Therefore, for the most part, I ain't doing it. Maybe if the intended victim were a child and the situation made it obvious that this wasn't just a parent disciplining said child (as in the aggressor had a knife, firearm or other weapon poised to use on the child) I would make an exception. Otherwise, where adults are concerned, if the incident is taking place somewhere that I can carry my firearm then I figure other adults (with a few exceptions, such as felons, etc.) have the same option of obtaining an HCP and going armed as I have. If they aren't willing to take on the responsibilities and potential risks of doing so in order to be prepared to protect their own lives then I sure ain't taking on the responsibilities and risks of protecting their lives for them.

I just wish that the legislature would pass a law stating that one's personal vehicle is an individual's personal 'domain' just like one's home. If written correctly (and IANAL so I don't know the exact language that would entail), aside from making the OP and others clearly okay in the aforementioned situation, it would achieve a lot of other good things, IMO - such as: 1. No need for a 'parking lot' carry law. Instead, the law should say that (other than LEOs with valid cause and a warrant) it is none of anyone's business what remains in your car regardless of where it is parked and no one has the right to tell you what you can or cannot have in your personal vehicle - including your employer while you are at work (even if your employer is the state of TN.) Of course, state law couldn't really change Federal employers' rules, I guess but it would cover everyone else. 2. Write the law so that it isn't anyone's business and you can't get in legal trouble if you have a firearm in your vehicle anywhere - even on school property - as long as it remains in your vehicle. 3. Allow people with no HCP who can legally have a firearm to legally keep/carry a loaded firearm in their vehicle just like they can at home.

So, do you think that those drunken idiots step out of the door of the bar and just teleport home so that there is no chance of running into them anywhere else? Do you think that the only time people are drunk is when they are in bars? I've seen drunk people in convenient stores, in Walmart and just walking down the street. Should carry be forbidden in those locations, too, just because the HCP holder might encounter a belligerent drunk? Stop in any place that sells beer not for on-site consumption on a Friday or Saturday night and chances are good that there will be some drunk who didn't plan ahead and buy enough booze before getting started and who is on a 'resupply' run. Should those of us who carry be required to stay away from any location where someone else may be drinking/drunk because of what someone else might do? Should we have our rights curtailed because someone else chooses to drink to excess in a public place?

I'm just impressed that anyone can afford to buy/keep that many firearms of any type. I don't own any HKs and my meager collection of firearms - long guns and handguns combined - wouldn't fill a red closet much less a red room.

I also have to wonder how eating in a crowded Cracker Barrel - or shopping in a crowded Walmart, for that matter - while armed and not consuming alcohol is any different from eating in a crowded O'Charley's while armed and not consuming alcohol. There are plenty of 'weird looking dudes' everywhere. So, are you saying that only OC should be allowed anywhere in public? Are you saying that the weird looking dude - if he is a danger - is somehow more dangerous at Applebee's than at Krogers?

Hell, I'd bet that those 'Bubbas' mentioned earlier put a heck of a lot more rounds downrange than do at least some LEOs. Further, what does the vehicle someone drives, the home in which someone lives or even educational level have to do with how well one can handle a firearm? Sounds pretty elitist, to me. By that logic, you'd expect Obama (who graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, rides in a Presidential limo and lives in the White House) to be one heck of a shot, huh?

Well, sometimes it is 'dirtier' than others but it is pretty nice. According to the date I put on the Photobucket folder, those pics were taken back in January of '09 (though stuff looks awfully green for January) - we were the only people there that day. We went to the range a couple of months back, though, and it was still there as of then. My problem is that I don't go there often enough. It is about an hour drive from our house. I get so excited about going and being able to shoot out to 100 yards that I want to take too many long guns - plus wanting to shoot handguns, too. I end up wearing myself out before I want to quit. More 'on topic', I keep looking at those Gerber axes - especially the ones that also have a fixed blade knife in the handle. I don't really do backpack camping, though, so I generally have a vehicle - and a full-sized axe - nearby.

When I click on the link all I get is the general, main Cherokee National Forest webpage. Are you talking about the Spring Creek Shooting Range near Delano, TN - on the Hiwassee River? There is the Gee Creek (State) Campground at/near the entrance to that part of the Cherokee National Forest but it is, I don't know, a couple of miles back from the shooting range. http://www.state.tn.us/environment/parks/Hiwassee/ Then there are designated 'pull off' type campsites here and there along the road that runs by the entrance to the range. I've never gone beyond the range entrance so I don't know if there are campsites beyond it (coming from the Delano direction) or not. Of course, since the Cherokee National Forest is pretty big and spread out (parts in the Tellico area, parts in the Vonore area, parts in the Delano area, etc.) you might be talking about somewhere else. Anyhow, Spring Creek is a pretty nice, basic outdoor range. Covered shooting areas with a 25 yard pistol range and 100 yard rifle range. Open daylight hours, has a cinderblock 'outhouse' type toilet facility and only costs $3 per vehicle not per person to shoot. No range officer. In fact, I think I might have some pics of the range floating around my Photobucket account... Yep. TNRat, is this the range you were talking about? Pistol side: Rifle Side: Except last time I was there the plywood target stands were gone and they had been replaced with more of the orange netting. I liked the plywood better but for the price to use the range, I'm certainly not going to complain.

When we were first married, my wife wasn't opposed to me owning guns but she wasn't entirely comfortable shooting them, herself. Basically, her late father was a pretty piss-poor example of a firearms owner (would get drunk and threaten to shoot others and himself, once pulled a pistol on his own brother over a pretty minor dispute.) Luckily, her grandfather also owns guns and was a better example. After we were married, she got a little more comfortable just being around guns, in general (I like to think that was because of my example) - and got used to shooting my .22 pistol. One day, I explained to her that I didn't want to push her but that I really would like her to learn to shoot at least some type of handgun in a defensive caliber as well as a shotgun and maybe a rifle. I told her that the reason was that, although we are only in our late 30s and will both hopefully have several more years, you never know what might happen. Plus, even if we live to a ripe, old age I might go first. I told her that if I go first, it would bring me at least some peace of mind to know that she could defend herself if I am not around. I think that, plus the idea of adding to her self-sufficiency, helped convince her to start. She now has a single shot 20 gauge (she picked it out at a gunshow and I bought it for her) that is her 'beginning' shotgun. She likes the simplicity and safety of the single - I'm hoping to work her up to a pump, eventually. She has also learned to shoot a snubnosed .357 (loaded with .38 Specials) pretty darned well. At least well enough that she passed her carry class with it. We'll work on a rifle, later.

IANAL and it is just my opinion but I wouldn't think she'd get in trouble as long as either you are in the car with the gun or both of you exit the car. If you went in somewhere, she stayed in the car and you left your pistol in the glovebox (which would kind of leave her 'in possession' of the loaded firearm, although I am not sure she if she would be in a legal sense) - on the very slight, off chance that anyone would ever even know - then who knows? Personally, I think a LEO would either have to already be ticked off or would have to be in a really bad mood to want to go through the trouble in that situation. Leaving a 'spare' in her glove compartment that she drives around with while you aren't with her, though, isn't something I'd want to risk. Things like this are part of the reasion I am glad that my wife decided to get her HCP, too. Since she is also now licensed to carry, it wouldn't matter. It also means I can hand her my BUG, etc. if we are somewhere and something just doesn't 'feel' right. Even if she never carries very often, herself, it is worth it for that. I guess if you were really worried, you could unload the firearm and put the pistol and ammo in different locations in the vehicle since a non-HCP holder can transport a firearm that way, legally.

Why do you have that impression? Not meant as a 'challenge' - I seriously want to know. I work at a satellite campus for a private college and the way I read the law you can't leave a firearm (doesn't say anything about loaded or unloaded from what I can find) locked in a vehicle or anywhere else on school property. The only legal thing is to have a firearm when you are picking someone up or dropping someone off - and you can't get out of the car, touch the firearm, allow anyone else to touch the firearm, etc. while on school property. Heck, I bet it would be illegal to even think about the firearm if there was some way to tell that you were doing so.

We've been discussing the new 'carry where alcohol is served' law so much that I forgot to mention that my wife's permit arrived in the mail this past Wednesday, June 9. She took her class on 5/15 and didn't go to the DMV, get fingerprinted, etc. until 5/21 so it actually took two days less than three weeks to arrive in the mail. Not bad, at all. She probably won't carry, much, but it is good to know that she can carry when she feels a need. Hopefully, those times will increase as she gets more used to the idea of carrying - I don't want to push her to the point that she gets tired of hearing about it and might not carry, at all. This way, I don't have to worry if I am going into a store, she decides to wait in the car and I want to leave one of my handguns with her, just in case (when I can carry, I almost always carry two.) So now, with my encouragement, my mom and wife both officially have their HCPs!

Which is even more confusing now that some federal lands - like National Parks, etc. are a go for carry. Also, I have to wonder if the 'no guns' rule at those campgrounds make an exception for HCP holders - sort of like last year when carrying in restaurants that served was legal for HCP holders. The 'Misdemeanor' signs stayed up - and still applied to everyone else - but having an HCP was a 'defense' to the charge.

The reason is that he, like some other restaurant owners, were whining that they were against the law because of 'safety concerns'. If these owners truly believed that having folks carry in their restaurants was not safe, you would think they would have posted to prohibit carry once the law went into effect in order to maintain safety in their establishments. The fact that Calhouns did not post indicates, to me, that they must not have had all that strong of 'safety concerns' - which leads me to believe that their real objections came down to fear of a loss of profits due to suddenly having to make a business decision, themselves - the same business decision that other businesses in TN were already making - rather than having the state make it for them. Now, I realize that a potential loss of profits is a legitimate concern for a business owner - but these restaurant owners should have just come out and said that (and I believe some business owners did - although I think that their concerns were unfounded) and left it at that rather than trying to add to the BS claims that an HCP holder carrying a firearm for self defense suddenly becomes a threat if he or she happens to be eating in the same room where someone else is having a beer, glass of wine, etc. Here is a quote from Mike Chase discussing last year's law which was still a bill at the time, I believe: http://blogs.knoxnews.com/flory/2009/03/ If he truly believed that restaurant carry would "endanger" his "customers and employees", shouldn't he have at least put up a sign? Doesn't the lack of doing so show him to simply be a liar, spoiuting that same, old fearmongering "It will be worse than the Wild West," BS that we hear over and over - which is even worse because apparently he didn't really even believe that garbage when he was spouting it.

The letter stated something to the effect of, "He is not a law enforcement officer or a private security guard..." So what? Is he a criminal? No? Then what's the friggin' problem? Yet another example of what I mean when I say that the world would be a much better place if more folks would just mind their own damned business. Why? Must have been just for clarification because, to my understanding*, the prohibition against carrying a firearm while attending a 'public gathering', which was already on the books, made it illegal to carry a firearm in church. *I am not a lawyer and don't play one on TV, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn last night. That said, I read up on the generalities of Georgia firearms carry laws last week in anticipation of spending last weekend visiting my grandfather in Georgia.

Okay, first, I realize that the jerk who owns Calhoun's was one of the bozos trying to block the restaurant carry law from passing last year (funny - seems like he was strangely quiet, this year.) Further, I consider him a complete hypocrite because after complaining so much about the law before its passage, his restaurants weren't posted after it passed. That said, there are still times when friends and/or family may want to eat there and I don't want to let my annoyance at that jerk cause me to miss spending time with folks I want to spend time with. Therefore, like it or not, there are times I will be eating at Calhoun's. Maybe that makes me a hypocrite, too (it kind of feels like it) but that is just the way it is. The reason for the question is that the Calhoun's in Lenoir City is at the Marina. I am wondering if that is actually on TVA land. I'm pretty sure that the park, etc. around it is on TVA property and it is, of course, right there at the Loudon Dam. I even have to wonder if the land that Calhoun's actually sits on is owned by Calhoun's or leased from TVA. Either way, I wonder about the legality of carrying in a restaurant that is sitting in the middle of a TVA property? Is it legal to carry on a TVA managed property? Of course, I guess this question applies to pretty much any restaurant so situated. I'm pretty sure that Calhoun's isn't the only such restaurant in TN - or even in this area. In fact, there is another little eatery that is kind of next to Calhouns, although it changes hands and closes then reopens so often I am never sure if it is in business or not.

Last year, after the restaurant carry law passed and before it was shot down, I was known on a couple of occasions to simply drive through a few parking lots here and there - close to the entrances - so I could see if places I liked to go were posting. Honestly, I was quite pleased with how few did.

I generally don't OC, but it seems that this guy simply went about his daily business while armed. There is no indication that he ever threatened anyone, used the firearm inappropriately, etc. yet this stupid woman seems to be more scared of an apparently honest, law-abiding citizen than of the fact that there are criminals out there brazen enough to rob people at gun point- even people who are obviously armed. We are turning into a nation that would rather offer our throats to the beast in the hopes that we will be spared than to commit the 'sin' of being ready to defend ourselves. Makes me sick.

Yep - great for pocket carry. Also works really well as a BUG in either the offhand pocket or in a simple ankle holster - so thin it doesn't make your pant's leg bulge at the ankle and so light that it doesn't feel like you are wearing ankle weights. Since pocket carry of a primary isn't my favorite - although I do carry the P3AT as primary that way, sometimes - I also have a FOBUS paddle holster for mine. Even OWB, it is so small, thin and light that it will disappear under a long T-shirt or even a long tank top.

That same question came up a in a thread a couple of months ago when I mentioned eating in a Mexican restaurant that doesn't serve booze but allows BYOB. I have specifically liked eating at that particular restaurant because they have good food and don't serve alcohol, meaning I could legally carry there (they even used to have a sign on the front door saying "We do not serve alcohol" - sign might still be there, haven't noticed.) In that post, I was saying that I ate at a restaurant, in the same room with folks who were drinking, and my handgun didn't jump out of the holster and start slaying folks. Someone else (maybe Fallguy or OhShoot, don't remember) brought up the question you were asking about whether they were still serving for on-premises consumption. In my case, the answer was still 'no' as the wait staff there simply brings out the glasses and, from what I have seen, customers open the beer/wine and pour it, themselves. Still, I agree that it is good we don't have to wonder, now. Just another example of why I think we gained more than we lost with the new law. Of course, we may both change our tunes if everywhere we normally go - even non-alcohol serving businesses - has posted a circle and slash by this time next month. I'm not too worried about that happening, though.

When I refuse to give my business to a place that has voluntarily posted a sign telling me that I (as an HCP holder and carrier of a firearm for self defense) am not welcome, it is a personal decision. I am not trying to organize a 'boycott' or tell others what they should do. I can only make my own decisions - as an individual. Therefore, my purpose - to not give my business to such an establishment - is served regardless of what any other individual chooses to do. Oh, and I like mayonnaise on some sandwiches and in chicken salad but would just as soon keep it away from my 9mms. Hot sauce would probably work better on a '9', anyway. Horseradish for the .357, maybe just a little vinegar and oil for the .38 and .380. You guys feel free to dress your .45s any way you want.

I think I see where you are coming from, Straight Shooter. I don't think what you are saying is necessarily true about all members of that age group but I do see some of that as being pervasive among some, maybe even many. In a lot of cases, though, I think it comes down to what they have been conditioned to believe and expect. As kids, many of them probably have been given everything they have asked for, whether their parents could afford it or not - then folks (including their parents) expect them to suddenly stop acting 'entitled'. I don't have kids so maybe I can't completely understand but, c'mon - folks can't expect to raise a Shih Tzu and end up with a Doberman - or expect that Shih Tsu to transform itself into a Doberman when it turns 18 - or 21.

+1. Last year, when carry in restaurants that served alcohol became legal the first time, Outback Steakhouse (the one in West Knoxville, at least) posted. Their posting (from what I recall) was neither a legal sign nor was it easily visible. Texas Roadhouse didn't post, at all. Guess what? I haven't been to Outback since. We've been going to Texas Roadhouse, instead - even after last year's law was overturned and I could no longer legally carry there - and I haven't missed Outback in the least. I figure that if Outback didn't want my business during that time then they don't want my business, ever. Another thing I like about this law is that it will help me avoid surprises. As I have said, before, the biggest reason I want to be able to carry where alcohol is served is that we often eat at 'mom and pop' type Mexican, Chinese, American, etc. type restaurants and most of them in this area offer beer among their beverage selectons. They don't have a bar area, many don't have 'Budweiser' signs in the windows, etc., they don't usually post the 'misdemeanor' sign in a very prominent place and there is often no way to know that they even serve beer until one is already inside, sitting down and looking at the menu. Before this change, someone who found themselves carrying in such a situation was technically, although unintentionally, violating the law. I mean, what was one supposed to do? Walk in the front door and say, "Do y'all serve booze?" If the answer were, "Yes," what should one have done, next? It would be kind of awkward to say, "Well, then, I guess I'd better go put my gun back in the car!" That 'unintentional carry where alcohol was served' thing happened to me on two, different occasions. It happened once in Sweetwater in a place where we had eaten a couple of times before I got my permit and I had never noticed they had beer. On that occasion, I had a 'clenched cheek' experience of having to walk past a table full of uniformed LEO on my way out the door. Made me glad that a P3AT in a pocket holster isn't very noticeable. It also happened once in a restaurant in Nashville when my wife and I were over there to attend a wedding. Now, as long as there is no sign on the front door, it doesn't matter and I don't have to worry about it. Yes, as others have pointed out, there may be places we have to go (hospitals, etc.) whose postings might have been in a 'grey area' before but now will be clearly legal. Do I like the idea of disarming or leaving my firearm at home to go to visit a sick relative or friend? Of course not - but I generally wouldn't have carried past the sign even when it might have been, technically, legal to do so.

Sounds like we are all pretty much thinking the same way - that our Second Amendment rights are important not only in and of themselves but also as they indicate how a candidate views a citizen's relationship with his or her government. Generally, I think that a candidate that doesn't show strong support of the Second Amendment has decided that honest citizens can't be trusted and need to be dependent on the government for even the most fundamental of protections - the protection of one's very life and the lives of loved ones. Thanks for the replies!