JayC

The firearm must be out of reach from the driver and any passengers, and the firearm and ammo out of reach of reach other.

Well I don't believe the parking lot bill is anymore constitutional than the legislature's current violations of the TN constitution regarding carry permits. But that is another discussion... Here you have the right to vote, which is a protected right... and the government selecting polling locations, that deny some % of HCP the right to carry, while allowing others to carry while voting. Polling places are not no carry zones, but placing them inside a school makes some polling places off limits. There is no equal protection under the law in this case... by placing my polling location in a school, the state sets up road blocks in allowing me to vote, that other HCP permit holders who live across the street from me (who have a different polling location) don't have.

Even that isn't as silly as a school... atleast with a government building you're only unarmed long enough to vote (still unconstitutional imho)... when the polling place is a school... you have to stop get out unload and lock the gfirearm up... drive onto school property, go in vote... drive off of school property reload your firearm and go about your business... it's a real hassle.

Agreed the state doesn't 'require TICS background checks on private sales, and NY does... doesn't change the fact that all new sales tax and regulate the purchase of a firearm and the paying of a fee to the state. As for pure possession, inside your home, you're golden... it's not a crime.. try moving it anywhere outside your home or property you own, and it is. Even having loaded firearms in your house is a crime under the law, we just have a defense against it. Are our laws the worse? No. Are they clearly bad and 'RINO's' in the legislature don't really care about our rights? Yes.

That is the grey area I was referring to in my original post.

It's a law that employers must allows their staff time off to vote. We had to make sure that all of our employees were given time off to vote if they wanted it. Whether it's intentional or not, the state should be required to find a voting location that isn't a no carry zone.

Look at 39-17-1309b1 right above it.. a felony and no exception for non-student adults... which my reading is the firearm must be unloaded, and separated from the ammunition, or you could be charged with intent to go armed, a felony in this case. It's not easy to stop off school property, unload the firearm, separate it from the ammo, store it out of reach of all passengers... then drive onto school property, vote, drive off of school property again, and re-ensemble the firearm for carrying. And it still doesn't change the fact that you're rendered unarmed while voting, which is not a requirement under the law... so why do some permit holders have to go unarmed while others don't while voting? Doesn't seem like equal access to voting if you ask me.

Just curious, my kids don't go to public school, but why were schools closed today? There were students there, and the parking lot was full of teachers vehicles... I'm not talking about seeing a student here or there... but 30-40 walking in a single file line down the hall between classes. Any chance that maybe your schools were closed but not all schools are closed today? Even still it doesn't matter, under the law schools are not care zones 24/7/365. Even if the building isn't used for a school anymore, and is only offices for the school district it's still covered.

The real problem is placing a polling station in an area that is off limits to 7-8% of the voting public. While other polling locations are in private (church) locations which allow carry. In light of the MD carry ruling from this week, it would see this is a violation of a HCP holders voting rights?

No there are students there... and even if they aren't it's still a school under 39-17-13xx

I just went and voted in the primary today, and a thought crossed my mind... Is the state of TN (or some subdivision of it) violating our right to vote by placing some polling locations in schools preventing HCP holder from being armed while voting, while placing some polling locations in private locations which allow carry? Would a posted private location be some type of violation as well? In all honesty I doubt anybody really cares, but with the grey area surrounding carrying of a loaded firearm even left in a vehicle in a school parking lot to go and vote, maybe being considered a felony... is the legislature disenfranchising HCP holders by placing polling locations inside schools?

You do it's just disguised better... In TN we call it TICS, where the state government (violating the state constitution IMHO) requires their approval and payment of a $10 tax on every firearm we purchase, so yeah we have to get a permit each and every time we purchase a firearm. Just remember in TN all firearm possession is a crime, they only have defenses against that crime. So in reality how much better are our laws than NY's? Neither state respects the 2nd amendment or their own constitutions. Just because TN gives us a few more crumbs, we're supposed to be happy?

Can you cite the law the allows the carry of firearms in a state park without a HCP at a campsite? I don't see that exception/defense in 39-17-1311. As for National Forrest's, they're also classified as WMAs, and carry is prohibited in WMAs except with a HCP, or valid hunting license with a firearm that meets the requirements of the game being hunted. So you can't carry a center fire firearm (long or handgun) if you're hunting for squirrels for example.

The only difference between TN and NY is that we are a shall issue state for a permit... otherwise the state infringes on our natural rights just as much.

IANAL, but 1308 only provides for defenses to 1307... Carrying a firearm in a park is prohibited in 39-17-1311, which has no camping defense. It would seem the camping defense would only apply to private property.

Court rooms while court is in session are off limits... per state law... the buildings which contain court rooms, must be posted like all other buildings to prohibit legal carry.

Did you carry it past a legal sign? Because court houses are not off limits under the law, only courtrooms while court is in session.

Uhh, I don't think that logic works... police officers can't take your DL and keep it anymore than they can take your HCP and keep it. My understanding of state law, unless there is a written order from the state or a judge, only THP can seize your drivers license... and state law prohibits all government officials from seizing your HCP unless given a written directive by TDOS or a judge.

Except we have an AG opinion, that states you can still be charged even if there is no posting, or the posting does not meet the requirements set out within the law

My bad

Isn't there a big corruption investigation about this DA and the a Drug Task Force than includes members of the Oak Ridge PD? Something about using seized assets for personal use?

Umm, maybe you care too much about what other people think?

I view the prescription drug laws generally as corporate welfare for Doctors and Hospitals... How silly is it, that an IV bag of salt water can land you in jail for the same amount of time as oxy? The reason... to force people to go see a Doctor pay that Doctor money even if a layperson knows what is wrong and what they need. Government sponsored corporate welfare... I'd do away with most if not all of the prescription drug laws... pain pills are an obvious concern... they serve a good medical purpose but are highly addictive... but I think the vast majority of adults know that, and take great care to try and avoid becoming addicted to them. Over the counter purchasing of pain pills probably would slight increase the addiction rate, by how much I don't know... I suspect the costs to society would be offset by the lower cost of their habit and reduced crime around their habit. Obviously as you said, the vast majority of people you're busting for prescription drugs have some valid prescription from a Doctor already... and they are just taking more than the Doctor thinks they should. Why make it criminal? Let them go and pick up a larger supply from the store, and take them. There are some drugs I might support prescriptions for... I don't have enough knowledge to make an informed opinion... for example drugs related to fighting cancer may need to be restricted because of the environmental risks to third parties, but I seriously doubt there would be much of a black market in those types of drugs for addicts and recreational users.

Dave, I'm all for arresting, and locking up criminals who are hurting others... I'm not some naive college student who thinks that we can create a utopia... There are bad evil people in the world who will commit horrible acts on good law abiding citizens... Good people will needlessly die in a free state.... but that is true in a police state, so I'd choose to have more freedom and be just as safe as I am today. Why are we using police officers for traffic enforcement? We have technology today that can do the job a lot better and a lot cheaper... oh yeah and it's safer for officers as well... That would free police officers up to focus on real criminals... DUI/DWI, DV, rape, murder, robbery, assault... Those things will keep happening, and are true crimes which we as a society need to punish. So, what drug dealers? If you legalize drugs... then you take away the criminal element from them... They can be sold over the counter and 20% of what they cost today... in pure safe form... again when was the last time you saw 1 liquor store owner do a drive by on another liquor store? Will there be some crime associated with the buying and selling of drugs... sure, we still see some crime associated with liquor... people still make moonshine and sell it because the taxes are too high (and I've heard it tastes great)... lower the taxes until the 'sin' tax is less than the cost of going around the sin tax, and most of that goes away as well... but even if you don't, that criminal activity is much easier to deal with than what we have today. 80% less cost for the product means that even if you average junkie is doing twice as many drugs... you're still going to see 50% fewer property crime for them to support their habit... So they're killing fewer home owners, because they have to steal less to stay gorked out of their minds all the time. You'll continue to have a small part of the junkie community over dosing and killing themselves... that % might go up a little from today... sad, but much less costly on society than 50% of our jails being filled with addicts. Sure, DUI rates will increase slightly... junkies are already killing people on the roads today... again in a free society bad things happen to good people... But, by taking away traffic enforcement, and getting rid of drug task forces... you'll have enough officers to be out and about looking for DUI's... If you see a crime (DUI) being committed, then there is nothing wrong with arresting somebody... you don't need a search warrant for that. But, long term technology is going to do away with DUI's 100%... it's 20-30 years away but it's a short term problem... the number of extra law abiding citizens who die between now and then would be a rounding error in traffic related deaths which will go away. I'm all for locking up criminals who physical hurt or steal from another person... I'm all for very long prison terms for both... Maybe if our jails weren't so crowded we could keep more of these evil men off the street longer.

No I understand the twisted logic that is used today to try and make things look legal.. A warrant can not be valid without probable cause, which specifies whom or what is to be seized and where. A 'blanket' warrant on it's face is unconstitutional. Because it can not list the person or item to be searched or seized, nor where that item/person is located. This is exactly why we have a 4th amendment, because we knew just how bad warrants could be abused. Patton, I understand this is not how our current legal system works today... I promise I'm not stupid I'm just saying the current system perverts our constitutionally protected rights.