JayC

Does your 3 year old attend a pre-school in the same building/campus as a k-12 school? Because pre-schools are not covered under the current law.

You're correct in this case you may use a citizen's arrest but not detain (again not recommended), I should have been more careful in the words I used... but there are cases where you may detain... such as shoplifting...

And wear a holster that prevents somebody taking your gun from you.

They can detain you if they see you committing a crime... Just like you can legally detain anybody you see committing a crime (not recommended). Security guards have NO SPECIAL AUTHORITY under the law.... They're just largely given a pass by most LEO's. But, they may not use deadly force to detain you.

I agree, and if on the jury wouldn't convict unless it was on the door and next to the door at eye level... But, do you really want to take that chance? I personally believe there is no political will to change 1359 right now... 1352a3 and a6... might be easier to change... they shouldn't be able to revoke or suspend a permit unless you're unable to qualify for the permit.

Yeah we're both on the same page Also I don't know under the current wording you'd have to be convicted or even charged with a crime... If TNDOS believed you violated 1359 it seems they could suspend or revoke... 39-17-1352a3 and a6 are bad parts of the law and need to get the axe.

I'm sorry but you're saying that you're legally obligated and responsible should some harm come to us while we're stopped and disarmed? Since we both know that is not the case, maybe I'd just rather keep my gun and protect myself and my family I'm just curious why as a LEO are you concerned about a HCP holder with a weapon? From a statical point of view it would seem that a we're the least likely to commit a serious crime... Also, just out of curiosity, when you do disarm a HCP holder, do you run the weapons serial number? Is this SOP for your department? I'm with Fallguy on this one, until the law is changed to require some valid reason to disarm HCP holders, I'm personally not going to inform... I won't lie, but I won't inform. Truth is it will probably never come up, I've not been pulled over for a traffic violation in 10 or 12 years, and seriously doubt that is going to change anytime soon (knock on wood)...

I'm not sure that is accurate, seeing as the only documented case of 39-17-1352a3 being used to suspend a permit of somebody who didn't violate any laws let alone part of 39-17-1351 thru 1360. Also note, that they can suspend based off of 39-17-1352a6 as well which states: So, yes DOS can suspend or revoke your permit if you're caught violating 39-17-1359 even though that violation would not prevent your from getting a permit in the first place. And if they become aware of your conviction under 39-17-1359 it would appear they are required to suspend or revoke your permit: As much as many people dislike a certain person who shall not be named We should all hope he is successful in getting his permit re-instated otherwise being caught inside a building where you didn't see the 2 inch by 2 inch ghost buster sign 4 inches above the ground 30 feet inside the building may result in your lifetime suspension of your carry permit not just having to pay $500. As much as we'd all like to see 39-17-1359 fixed or removed.... Personally I'd like to see 39-17-1352a3 and a6 removed first.

My guess is the odd ball comments from Legislators and the Sec of State are due to the fact they read the original bill and didn't bother to check the Amendments... I find it a sad state that Fallguy and I know the SB3012 (now law), and the guys who got elected to vote on it don't bother to do their homework.

The bill last year had a date which had already passed (June 1st), in cases such as that the law goes into effect 40 days (Constitutional requirement) after passage of the law... You'll note it wasn't 40 days after somebody signed it, or the Sec of State issued a public chapter, or anything else, it was 40 days after the veto override. The bill passed this year says it shall to into effect immediately, and therefore goes into effect immediately. Again, the law is in effect now IMHO...

Do the signs say No Guns or is it a firearm with a circle and slash?

According to the Constitution (for what it's worth), the law only has to be signed by both speakers before being sent to the Governor... Which they both already signed it... To override the veto just requires a majority vote from both houses, and for the vote to be recorded, then according to the Constitution the bill becomes law. Until somebody points to a law or legislature rule that requires a bill to be issued a public chapter #, or be sent to the Sec of State before going into effect, I'm sticking to the law went into effect on Friday night.

Guys, I can't find any law that requires the Sec of State to do anything to a bill for it to become effective... Or have a public chapter # to be effective... Unless somebody can find a law or house rule that requires it, according to the state constitution the law went into effect the minute the house passed the bill and entered the vote into their records. Honestly, I seriously doubt there is such a rule or law, because it would allow the executive branch to slow down bills or even halt bills that the legislature has passed and would otherwise be legally in effect... After watching hours and hours of the legislature, it's possible but I seriously doubt it. I believe Senator Jackson is correct the law went into effect at approx 10pm Friday night. The news papers and the statement from the Sec of States office appear to be clearly mis-informed... The July 1st date is for sure wrong as I read the amendments to the bill.

With the crazy disarm law we have here in TN, I'd just not inform... Frankly, I'm not sure I'd answer the question if the officer asked (I would NOT lie, just avoid the question)... Frankly having somebody handling my firearms who I don't know and who may or may not be properly trained on those models of firearms concerns me a great deal. Again, I wouldn't lie to the officer... but I'm for sure not telling him about somebody else carrying... and probably with the law how it's currently written won't tell him about myself either... I can just see a ND happening having a dead officer laying on the side of the road and having to try and explain to his buddies who show up he shot himself while trying to secure my firearms for 'safety' reasons.... no thanks!

I've got the HCP in the ID window on my wallet, because I figure if I need to show somebody my ID it's likely a LEO and I want them to see that first before anything else. I normally just refuse to show my ID to anybody else... With very few exceptions... Clerks will argue for a second sometimes, then they just give in and sell you stuff anyhow.

I fully agree, but it's my understanding that the last case was a bunch of doe plaintiffs and today we still don't know who we should be boycotting.

I suspect they'll use John Doe lawsuits.... otherwise these servers are likely to be without a job in short order. If an establishment isn't going to post it's likely they won't be very happy about their name getting dragged into an anti-gun lawsuit.

Well personally... I'd carry a copy of the newspaper if need be An officer would have to be hiding under a rock to not know about this veto override. Honestly I think carry is completely safe right this second as long as the location is not posted. No DA in their right mind would try to split hairs over when a bill technically went into effect ... the bill passed is is now the law of the land, go out and enjoy... Just remember to be back here in a couple of weeks so we can all start focusing on getting rid of 40 legislators who need to loose their jobs come Nov, and then we can focus on repealing even more of the silly restrictive gun laws next sessions which continue to violate our rights protected under the US and TN constitutions

Guys, I'm not sure where this requirement for having a public chapter number is coming from... but SB3012 appears to be law as of last night... Here are the important bits from the state constitution. Here is the part about passing bills normally... Note the very last part in bold... It will be important for the next section... Here is the part about vetos and overriding them... You'll note that the bill only has to be signed by both speakers BEFORE sending the bill to the Governor... On over ridding a veto, it clearly says once passed by both houses it shall become law. It doesn't say once submitted to the Sec of State and it's issued a public chapter number... Unless there is a state law I'm missing, it sure appears as if SB3012 is the law of the land as of last night... Anybody care to point to why they think we have to wait on a public chapter before carrying?

If you're sitting in the stands, the now old law (pre-SB3012) only prohibits carrying INSIDE a BUILDING where alcohol is served by the drink. It doesn't cover places outdoors. Either way, SB3012 became law last night (some question as to whether carry is legal right away or Monday/Tuesday when the Sec of State issues a public charter) Either way I suspect you'd have no problems carrying at Greer unless it's posted.

5 minutes ago

The new question is which 30 Legislators need to find a new job come Nov

Finally... just minutes away from the bill becoming law.... Lets hope this is the last time we have to mess with restaurant carry.

Well looks like we can all still run for Sheriff whether we're POST certified or not

Anybody watching this discussion over HB1196.... Do we really want to say you must be a POST certified LEO with 3 years of experience to get elected Sheriff? We wonder whats wrong with our government, watching this feed makes me sick sometimes.