JayC

Per an AG letter, no case law on the subject that I'm aware of... unless you are? Not a good plan, to push your luck... but it's going to be hard to prove that you intended to carry in a school, walking into a hospital.

Dave, It's all about choices...You can always choose to take a different job that doesn't require flying... Nobody is holding a gun to your head and requiring you to take that job... You make a choice to work at that company in that role. I left working for a large company about 5 years ago... I make less money today than I did when I worked there, but I'm my own boss, and don't have to worry about having to fly anywhere or go anywhere (other than government buildings) disarmed.... Oh yeah and I'm a lot more happy As for family vacations.. I want to visit Alaska... I think it would be fun to go up there and hunt a little, and just see the sights with my family... I refuse to fly anymore unless it's a life or death emergency... and I haven't figured out a way to get up there without having to leave my handgun here at home... so until I figure out a way up there, Alaska is off my vacation list... so we'll go somewhere else instead... So yes, flying is always a choice.

The federal government? Not likely... I'm posting on a gun forum, unless they've requested the subscribed information on every visitor (and assuming I'm not smart enough to not visit a gun forum from my home), they have no clue who is visiting this forum. But Internet privacy is and should be a serious concern. Background checks for firearms, are deleted by the state every 24 hours, it's illegal for the state to turn those over to anybody else without a warrant, and illegal to create databases of firearm purchases... Yes the fact we have an unconstitutional TICS system in this state is a very valid reason for concern. If you're talking about the 4473's, then yes the ATF can come in and request to copy those, but they're prevented by law from compiling a database of firearm purchases. So they are required to comb through stacks of paper to track things down. As for my carry permit, yeah that is in a database the feds probably can get access to... maybe a good bit of legislation we should have passed, blocking access without a search warrant? I believe the regional ERM data clearing houses are supposed to go into effect in 2015... Many of the regulations haven't been released yet, but it's clear they're headed towards patient record sharing between helathcare providers... You do the math on what that exactly means... I spent 7 years working in computer security of a large healthcare company, I can read the tea leaves from obamacare, online medical records that are available to any provider is where all of this is headed.

You do realize there are 2nd amendment supporters who do not support the parking lots bill? Because they also support private property rights. We should be focused on removing postings from public locations... Having vehicles covered under the home exception for firearms... Or getting true constitutional carry.... Not trying to tell a business owner what he needs to do with his property.

Something you and I completely agree on... Do away with the TSA... I disagree on using police officers to replace them... Place security back in the hands of the airlines... You'll see some airlines who take security seriously and others who have very lax security... We the customer can choose which airline to fly with. The fact is with reinforced cockpit doors and passengers who understand to fight back... 9/11 could never happen again.

The issue is because obamacare requires the use of online and linked electronic medical records. So by asking this question you doctor is in effect posting whether you own firearms to an online website which the government has access to.... And it's not just limited to questions about firearms that should concern you.

Schools have to be posted... Just a slightly different verbiage under a different section of the law.

That is so insulting to pet rocks... We'd be better off with a D in that seat...

Good luck... All she has to do is sign a letter and the signs are gone... She won't sign that letter... Every time I see her I bring it up.

It's not limited to just the Obama administration, although this administration has been much more blatant about violating the constitution... As for AQAP, the three attempted attacks I was referencing were the Christmas Day underwear attack, the Fedex Printer attack, and the attempted new underwear bombing a couple of months back (the one mentioned in the leak probe currently ongoing). First, Al-Qaeda is a different group of people thank Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula... While they have similar sounding names, the leadership is different, and the goals are slightly different. AQAP didn't exist and wasn't involved in the 9/11 or Cole attacks, that was Al Qaeda. AQAP primarily had been targeting Saudi interests in the area, it wasn't until the US started targeting AQAP with drone strikes in Yemen did they start to make efforts to attack the US mainland or US forces in the region. Does that make the current efforts any less evil? No. But, it's important to know there is a clear difference between the two groups... There were even members of AQAP that may have been on the US payroll after 9/11 helping stamp out terrorists here in the United States including Alwaki. It's like saying because the "Bayou Knights of the Ku Klux Klan" (based in Louisiana) attacked us, that we are free to target the "Knights of the Ku Klux Klan" (based in Arkansas) because they are similarly named, believe in similarly crazy ideas, and come from the same general area of the country. Even though they are 2 separate groups... You can't blame one for the actions of the other. The news organizations mostly re-print government press releases in this country... It's rare that they dig any deeper into the details unless there is a political motive to do so.. So lets focus on the real evidence... the videos where Alwaki says crazy stuff... I've watched the videos, have you? There are much to do about nothing... he promotes a crazy version of Islam, using his religious beliefs to justify jihad on the west... With some praise tossed in there for fighters who have attacked the United States and other western interests... The thing is if he had sat on his couch here in the US and said the same things, all of it would appear to have been protected speech... and frankly I didn't find this crazy logic anymore offensive that Jeremiah Wright's sermons. I've seen a lot more videos from crazy american nazi's which was just as bad as what Alwaki was calling for.... and again protected speech. He was never charged with a crime, there wasn't even an arrest warrant out for him... he likely was guilty of something, but if he really was a regional commander in Al-Qaeda, why would we not attempt a raid similar to the one of Bin Laden? Who knows what treasure trove of intel was destroyed with him. At the end of the day, I'm not convinced he was an 'operational member' of AQAP, maybe someday the truth will come out, but either way, we're not at war with Yemen, AQAP had nothing to do with 9/11... and the constitution is clear, you can't execute american citizens without due process of law.

First, you and I don't have any proof that he was an enemy combatant, much less his teenage son who was killed 2 weeks later... The Obama Administration claims (without showing one shred of proof) that he was involved in "operational" planning. Your class on the rules of war seems to be completely different than the classes I had... I was taught that you're not allowed to intentionally target unarmed civilians, and that is a very fine line... bomb an arms factory and kill 100's of civilians working there... valid military target, collateral damage... kill some unlucky man driving across a bridge at the wrong time, collateral damage.... rounding up 'military aged' men and shooting them because the town is harboring a guerrilla force that killed my men yesterday, war crime... shooting the same 5 men if they're armed running away from my force, perfectly fine... I'm not suggesting that our war fighters must place their lives at greater risk on the battlefield when dealing with armed enemy combatants just because the combatants happen to be American civilians... You don't see me arguing about the civil rights of Johnny Walker Lindh, who was captured on a battlefield armed fighting American soldiers. I'm not suggesting we hamstring the military as we do with the ROE in the sandbox today... Only that we follow our Constitution and the rules of war we have legally agreed to abide by. But, even under the relaxed definition of 'unlawful enemy combatant', Alwaki doesn't fit... Could there be some secret evidence that he was involved in planning operations against the US? Sure, but show me the proof, no offense but I'm not going to take the Obama Administrations word for it... There are hard limits that are placed on the government for a reason... they make situations such as these harder... It's much simpler to drop a bomb and do away with somebody who is a problem... but we don't allow the Constitution doesn't allow for that expediency... Are we a nation of laws, or a nation of men? The Obama Administration won't even publish the legal justification for killing American citizens without due process of law, how can a document which contains nothing but legal opinions on the justification to use deadly force against American citizens be a national security secret? We're not even talking about the evidence they had, just the legal opinion to justify their actions... that is secret? The current administration won't even agree to limit themselves to only performing these drone attacks against American's in far away lands, they believe this legal justification is valid within the borders of the United States, yet they won't publish the legal justification? Anyhow, Alwaki never posed a serious threat to our country... AQAP is nothing more than a pain in our butt today, and for the foreseeable future... They had managed to attempt 3 attacks on the United States (which only began after we started attacking them in Yemen)... None of which were successful.... The "links" not withstanding media claims between Alwaki and the Fort Hood shootings are questionable at best, the emails traded back and forth were reviewed by military investigators and determined to fall under Constitutionally protected religious correspondence. The military read these emails, knew who they were to/from and didn't find them threatening enough to do anything about. There are bad people in this world, some of which deserve to die, and Alwaki may very well be one of those men... but that isn't the call our President gets to make... When the Constitution can be set aside because it's too hard to bring a citizen to justice, on the say so of 1 man who is not held accountable to the limits placed on him... we no longer have a Constitution. I took an oath to uphold the Constitution, I suspect from reading different posts of yours on the forums, you did as well... My point is simple, targeting Alwaki the way we did crossed the line and was a clear violation of the 5th Amendment, it's not the first time (and I think we can both agree on this) this President has violated his oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. I'm afraid it won't be the last time he violates the Constitution, and unfortunately Presidents down the road will likely uses these violations as justification for their own violations. And that worries me a great deal.

There is a big difference between killing armed soldiers on a battlefield and dropping a bomb on somebodies head who is unarmed, 1000's of miles away from any battlefield.

Wonder who Time's source was? hmmm But, this earlier article from BBC (also covered by CNN), from a source in Yemen instead of the White House: Who knows, maybe some of these reports are wrong? But it's enough to be curious... The administration tried to either mislead the public on the teenagers name, or our intelligence on a native born citizen is so bad we don't know what decade he was born in...

Yeah, he was killed on the same day as another HVT, but NOT in the same strike... The strike that killed him was not the same strike that killed Ibrahim al-Banna and a brother of Fahd al-Quso.. There were 3 different drone strikes that day in the same town... Press releases from the Obama administration tend to gloss over that little fact and try to paint it as this kid was sitting next to the HVT's, that doesn't appear to be the case. News reports place Alwaki's son eating barbecue outside with other "teenagers"... could some of them been militants? maybe... but they weren't HVT's it would appear. What raises even more questions is how the Obama Administration first attempted to classify Alwaki's son as a militant in his twenties, and therefore a valid military target... and stuck by that claim until the family provided a copy of his Colorado birth certificate showing he was 16. Now that poses a very interesting question, how did he get labeled a 20 year old militant? Wouldn't the CIA have known his real age seeing as his birth was a matter of public record? Now, months later we learn the Obama administration in an attempt to keep collateral damage numbers down, had been counting all "military age men" killed in all drone strikes as militants and not civilian deaths. More questions than answers

You know people keep saying that, but I watched a number of his internet youtube videos... He didn't say anything that Jeremiah Wright didn't say from his church in Chicago.... And as much as we all love Jeremiah Wright, I don't think any of us would accuse him of being a terrorist. Awlaki, may very well have been a very bad dude who needed to be killed, but I no longer trust the government to make that call by themselves behind closed doors. There is a reason we have a limit on the power of the Government to arrest and hold people, let alone kill them... and there are reasons why no exception was added to the 5th Amendment... our founding fathers had seen the abuse of exceptions under the British crown. Why did I bring Fast and Furious into the mix, if the Administration will lie under oath to Congress about something as minor as that, how can anybody be sure they wouldn't lie to the American people on a Sunday talk show about Awlaki's terrorist involvement? Does that mean they lied? Who knows, but I personally would want a jury of his pers to atleast look at the evidence and find him guilt before killing him. I understand that in war, soldiers are required to defend themselves, and at times American citizens could be killed while fighting against our military on the battle field, and that American citizens might be killed as collateral damage in a war zone. It's sad when it happens, but it's war... But, neither of these are part of Alwaki's situation... He wasn't killed on the battle field while armed... He wasn't collateral damage... He was targetting and killed on orders from the President of the United States, with no judicial review, no verdict by a jury of his peers... unarmed riding down the road in a car, 1,000's of miles from any American troops... Again, he may very well have been a terrorist, but what proof do you have that is the case? What evidence do you have? Other than second hand accounts from an administration who has point blank lied to our face? Yet 2 more who won't get any christmas cards from this forum... The first was Samir Khan, who was the editor of a jihad magazine, was killed on the same day as Alwaki... He wasn't accused of being involved in 'operational' planning, just opps we killed another American... The second, was Alwaki's 16 year old son, who was killed in a separate drone strike 2 weeks later. Again, not even a peep from the President on what his supposed crimes were... I know, you'll all say it was just a matter of time before he became a traitor too... but yet he wasn't even accused of committing any crimes, nor acts of terror. If the President can label somebody a terrorist, and then order the military to kill them as they drive down a road... where does his power stop? We fought the revolutionary war with a King who didn't even have the power to have somebody summarily executed. They had to at least have a trial. And as you've said this administration lies, more than most... what if they lied to us about any of this? As I said above... Alex Jones is mostly entertainment for people who like to believe in that kinda stuff, but sometimes he does break good stories (being one of the first to bring Fast and Furious to light for example...

Can you show me the jihad exception in the Constitution? And he isn't the only American we've killed over in Yemen, we knowingly killed a 15 year old and a 29 year old, neither of which have been accused of committing jihad against America. SCOTUS has ruled we can't put minors who rape and murder to death, yet the President can? With no judge or jury finding them guilty? This Administration got up in front of congress and sworn under oath that they had not allowed any straw purchases to be gunwalked into Mexico... It wasn't until a whistle blower from the F-troop (BATFE) came forward and provided documentation that those statements were false, did the chief law enforcement officer of the United States came clean about the 'mistake'. Yet somehow I'm supposed to believe the administration when they send people out on talk shows telling us "oh sure he's a terrorist, he planned attacks on us... but we can't show you any proof"... I'm somehow supposed to believe they're telling the truth then? They won't find a 'mistake' in those statements down the road? So, where exactly is this exception to the 5th Amendment? We have 3 people who have been killed by the Presidents order who were US citizens, far away from a war zone, unarmed.

Is that any crazier than some of the stuff the government is telling us? If you had told me 15 years ago that American citizens would have their email, and web traffic scanned by the federal government without a warrant... I would have called you nuts... If you had told me 10 years ago that the President would be able to order the assassination of an unarmed American citizen in a far away country because arresting him was too difficult, I would have thought you were nuts I'm not saying this story is accurate, but the bar is much higher now to just say 'nahh the government would never do that'. Frankly, I like watching Alex Jones, it's kinda like watching a real life version of the X Files, but it's just entertainment to me... I don't buy into the whole centuries long quest to gain control over the entire worlds population... But, I don't just dismiss out of hand anything said about the Government today... because what I thought was unbelievable a decade ago has come to pass today.

I'm very familiar with the sovereign citizen movement, I'm aware of the West Memphis shooting, and the troubled past that family had with law enforcement. But that situation is completely different from this situation... Nobody is questioning whether police officers can come up to you and start a conversation, ask questions or even ask for ID... nothing wrong with any of that... The issue comes from not having reasonable articulated suspicion that a crime was being committed... it's clear that a reasonable person who KNOWS the law, that no crime is being committed, and that is the standard in this case. So instead of taking the polite no thanks to showing ID, and leaving since no crime is being committed, the try and get the people tossed out of the restaurant... they pull the guy away from his meal, and bother him for what appears to be nothing else than a lecture.... those actions I have a problem with.... Terry stops require a reasonable suspicion, not a gut feeling, or a what if... They had to have know there was no crime being committed before talking to the restaurant manager about asking these folks to leave... and therefore that action crossed the line. As for sovereign citizens (instead of the normal it could be terrorists! excuse), the worse thing you could do is have unnecessary contact with them... They don't tend to go out and hunt police officers, they tend to react to perceived violations of their God given rights, so if you suspect that somebody is a sovereign citizen and they aren't breaking the law, the LAST thing a police officer should be doing is forcing contact with them that could escalate to violence is a crowded restaurant.

And what are the chances that some other hot head, who doesn't have ro can't get a HCP is the one to whip out a pistol? You'd ask everybody else to be unarmed and unable to defend themselves and their families? Here is a little secret, people who have hot heads where they'll pull a gun to resolve a dispute at a softball game likely don't have a HCP because they likely have a criminal background already prohibiting them from getting one.

Care to post your business name and location so it can be added to the list of businesses that have posted? That way TGO members can steer clear? I'm sure I'm not the only one here that would want to avoid giving you any business As for getting people arrested, best of luck... you'd be the first business owner in the state to get somebody charged under 1359, with no other violations of the law... and I've heard a rumor that a certain group is looking for that exact case to take to court to challenge the posting law... But, hey it would be great word of mouth for your business I'm sure

It's ok no hard feelings... I'm just trying to keep the discussion honest... TN gun laws are confusing enough without people making wildly incorrect claims based on feelings, instead of facts... You know the law, and will provide cites when you're making an argument... I just wish others would as well

You're focusing on the wrong issues my friend... focus on the root cause of the problem... The issue isn't AIG's Sharia Law insurance... they as a private business should be able to sell whatever product they want... The issue is the government bailed AIG out to begin with... No bail out, no questionable use of taxpayer funding to bail our Sharia Law based 'insurance'. The problem isn't that Islam is about to take over, the problem is that our own government is violating the constitution day in and day out... What are the chances you'll ever live a single day under Sharia law here in the United States? Virtually none... The chances that we have another civil war? Economic Meltdown? Live in a Police State? How on earth does Islamic invasion make it into your top 5?

Here you go, because typing tca 39-17-1359 into Google is just so hard to do: Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1359

No you completely missed my point... First, wd-40 makes the claim that somehow postings by the government (of non-special classes of locations, schools, park, etc as outlined in my post) are somehow different than posting of privately owned locations... Which is complete and utter non-sense, both are covered under 39-17-1359. The post was to point out that he should stop spreading misinformation about posting laws, unless he can cite a law or a criminal case to back up his claim. And in thiscase there is very little to no case law on point, and the law is fairly clear. I'm not advocating that anybody break the law, only that general government buildings (not special victim zones) are covered under the EXACT same law as private businesses, and have the same requirements to post to prohibit carry. And like you I will NOT do business with anybody who has a sign posted, whether it's legally binding or not, government locations are a little different... largely I have no other option, so if they're not legally posted, I don't disarm.

So which exact law other than 39-17-1359 covers governments in this situation? Show me a single prosecution under 1359 in either case where only a 1359 violation is being charged. Anybody can make silly factually incorrect statements... Time to back them up, please cite the law or a case which backs up your comment.