DaveTN

Thanks, I ordered it this morning on-line. No one had it locally and Nashville and Madison wouldn’t answer the phone. Seems the CA guys (TCP Global) have a warehouse in Duncan SC; so it cost less and won’t take as long as I thought.

    With the ruling on the Montana Firearms Freedom act, it's pretty worthless isn't it?

We all understand that, and it does not matter; nothing critical about it.   JayC, as a former cop I can assure you people that have been drinking can’t remain silent, of course they have the right; they don’t have the ability. Anyone that’s worked the streets will tell you the same thing. We are also discussing situations where your actions caused the Office to think you are drinking and carrying a gun. No field sobriety tests, no urine tests, none of that. Just you and the cop standing in front of a Judge or jury telling what they observed. Of course you won’t be saying anything, so it will be a pretty one sided story. At that point it’s really immaterial; most folks would rather just know that in Tennessee it’s against the law to drink and carry a gun; they aren’t interested in being a test case.

Thanks, I’ve been to the place that’s listed as a dealer in Shelbyville; they can order it, but don’t have it. Can’t find any in Murfreesboro. I may have to go to Nashville.

   It would only be an issue if the Police were standing in your home for some reason. Just like DUI I see no exception for private property. Is it an issue? No, it’s just another charge if they are already there for something else. Neighborhood situation, Domestic Violence, most any other type of investigation, etc.

Yes, if you aren’t in a bar you will lose your permit for the amount of time from your conviction to whenever you have met all the requirement of the court; probation, paid fines, etc. If you are convicted of being in a bar; it’s at least 3 years. But I really wasn’t addressing any of that. I was merely saying that it’s illegal to be “under the influence” and carry. There is no requirement for the state to prove you were impaired. In a bar it doesn't even require you to be "under the influence"; only consuming.

Anyone here in that business? Or know of a good place that stocks it? I need some “House of Kolor” primer, base, clear, etc. The only place I can find it (on-line) is in California and has to ship ground.

Don’t buy that M&P!! You won’t be able to sell off those Glocks fast enough.

"a" has no requirement that you be in a bar. Or even in public.

What federal gun laws are they enforcing that are not a crime at the state level? Is this really an issue? Who are they arresting and what are they being charged with? They tried to tie the hands of TN Leo’s on enforcing immigration laws; saying the state does not have the authority to protect its own state. I don’t know if that has worked its way through the courts yet.

Crystal clear to me. Read (a) and stop. There you have your answer. (B simply removes the “under the influence” requirement and tells you can’t carry and drink in a bar; not a sip and removes any “under the influence requirement” Someone calls the cops and tells them you are standing at the bar drinking while carrying a gun. They walk in and see you drinking; game over.

The fixed level of BAC is the legal standard for IMPAIRED. 39-17-1321 does not require that you be impaired; only under the influence. You are making the same mistake kids make when they say “I wasn’t drunk” after being charged with DUI. You don’t need to be falling down drunk to be impaired per the dui laws and you only need to be about .02% to be under the influence. .08 is a legal presumption; some states allow DUI convictions at much lower BAC levels with supporting evidence. I don’t know why you think it would be a hard conviction without implied consent or BAC testing. It’s done every day in DUI cases with a much higher standard when dealing with those who refuse. Here is what the Appeals Court at Jackson had to say about it in STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DONALD STEVE SIKES.   I can’t comment on that; I don’t have access to search case law. Where do you do it? It’s also been a long time since I’ve seen access to the specific people and why they were suspended, revoked, or refused. Is that still available somewhere? However, the bottom line is this: If people want to know if they can legally drink while they are carrying; the answer is “No” and the law is clear. They can read the law right here in this thread and make the determination if it applies to them. For a person teaching a training class to answer that they would need to be proven to be impaired would be wrong. Explaining it any other way in a class would not be doing the class justice. Unless the class was on how to be a test dummy for the legal system.

If they are cases that address carrying a gun; give us case name. If they pertain to DUI; they are irrelevant.   Certainly it does. There is no requirement for impairment; only “under the influence”. If the cop thinks you have been drinking and wants to charge you; that is what will happen.   Why not; that’s the law? (if the Officer can tell you have been drinking) However they shouldn’t be scared based on what someone tells them; they should read the law and make an informed decision since they will be the one paying the price.  

You can’t argue that you can drink alcohol unless you argue “under the influence”. Problem with that is that it doesn’t require being intoxicated or impaired, and has no BAC levels, or even the requirement that you be offered a BAC test. So unless there is case law on it I would guess it would be you and the Officer showing up in front of the Judge and testifying as to what happened; and him making a decision. Good luck with that if you have been drinking and carrying.

Why is the guy who wrote this story blaming cops; did cops start writing laws in Mississippi? Cops are as diverse a group as any. It’s usually made up BS when people start making claims about “Police Officers” or “Police Departments”. If the legislators are afraid of passing laws, it isn’t because of cops. It’s either because they don’t want to or they know they won’t get reelected if they do. “The campus police chiefs of the University System of Georgia” My gosh, that has to be a big scary group.

Let me see if I understand this correctly... It is a crime for a person to carry around a loaded gun in this state. However, if you pay the state money they will give you a permit that will require private business owners to recognize your 2nd amendment rights? Is that what some of you are wanting? Because to me that’s a sign of a thug government and something a liberal Democrat would come up with. I’m not okay with pitting us against business owners just because it’s a pro-gun issue; that’s a fight we will lose. Nothing good can come out of it until THE STATE recognizes our second amendment rights. And the last time I checked rights were for all the people; they were not for sale. It would never hold up in court anyway.

Those classes are to inform the people; the classes are not bound by the letter of the law. Laws generally let you know what you can’t do; not what’s a good idea to do. I am fully aware (as are most here) that I’m not required to hand over my HCP; just like I’m not required to roll down my widows and turn on my dome light at night. I do those things for several reasons; I respect cops, I have been in their shoes, and by showing them that courtesy I reduce the chances of me getting a ticket. Nothing wrong with teaching that in a class.

Bingo.

The VEHICLE data is not always the best to go by. If the vehicle data and the tire manufacturer data are different; go by the tire manufacturer data. Some vehicle manufacturers will suggest lower pressures so they can pass roll over tests; even when the tire manufacturer advises them against it.

#1 looks like the Cortner Mill Restaurant on the Normandy Dam.

So everything is good and the barrels have been threaded and shipped back to the OP?

Is it the press or is our military a bunch of crybabies? This has been going on for decades. We are spying on them and shadowing their subs, and we get indignant over getting buzzed? Sounds like some folks in the Pentagon need to find a new line of work. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russian-jet-fighter-did-barrel-roll-over-us-reconnaissance-plane-cnn/ar-BBsqPI2?ocid=spartanntp

The burglar won’t do time for this one. He’ll sue the kids parents and then offer to drop the suit if they drop charges. That’s how our “legal” system works.

So you just make up any kind of a stand on any issue and write about it. :screwy: You would think that a writer that was any good would be able to find something worthwhile to write to about.

Exactly. In danger of death or great bodily harm. Now you can add all the “what if’s” or BS war stories to that you want. We could fill this thread with stories of folks that shot someone in self-defense and were not charged, or we could fill it with stories of folks that are in prison because they mistakenly thought they could simply tell someone they were in fear of their life after shooting someone. The direction of this thread was a question about the laws of this state; not a “what would you do” thread. So that’s what some of us are addressing. You need to understand the laws and be clear on what they say; and their intent. You need to understand that a bunch of people will judge everything you did. The difference is that they will have days or weeks to judge the decision you made in a couple of seconds. No one here is trying to say that you can’t defend yourself with deadly force. But you are either naïve or don’t understand the law if you believe you can kill someone that is trying to escape and then claim self-defense. It may have worked in some cases, but who wants to risk prison, or the cost of a criminal trial to find out. The specifics of every cases are different and are judged on their own merit. We have seen that clearly in some of the cases we have discussed on this forum.