macville

He doesn't have to. I can tell you without being a lawyer that he does not understand what the law says. I would say that if we can't get the opt-out removed, there at least needs to be a line added to the law that would make it a defense to the law if the proper signs were not posted. To be honest, we shouldn't have to add that since the wording is pretty plain. However, since people like the AG want to read stuff into the law that is simply not there, we have to add wording to make it even MORE clear. Matthew

I would say that Wamp isn't, but as Ramsey was one of the main forces in Nashville pushing for all the gun bills which got passed this year, so I'd say he can back up what he says. Matthew

Here's a question. Is an open carried firearm on an LEO making a statement? Give me some opinions and then I'll continue my thinking aloud. Matthew

I believe there was an article in yesterday's KNS (it might have been an option piece) that stated the first $9000 in fines collected each month was split 50/50 and then after that it was something like 80% to the camera company. If that's true, that really makes me mad. I find absurd that a private business can get a single penny of any fine in the first place, but 80% is just plain wrong. Matthew

Wow, you used a word I actually did not know and had to look up. My point was that by having the traffic cameras, money that normally wouldn't be going out of the community is because half the fine you would pay on one of those camera tickets goes to a company out of state. Yes, the camera will bring in more money than an LEO writing tickets. However, it also takes money away from local businesses and whatnot because if they hadn't gotten the ticket (and probably 95% of the people caught wouldn't have gotten a ticket if it had been in person instead of a camera) they would have probably spent the money locally. I hate that it's actually a revenue generator but we are lied to that it's for "public safety." If it actually did some good, you know, changed behavior, then there might be a reason for it. But I still see people run the lights every time I'm at a camera light... Matthew

How sad is that statement:( Matthew

Someone brought up a very good point in the comments. The Red light/speed cameras take a lot of money out of our local (Oak Ridge/Knoxville) economy. Why? Because 50% of any fine from the camera goes to the camera company. That is several millions of dollars each year. I don't know about you, but an extra 2-4 million in our local economy is a VERY good thing. Matthew

All I am saying is that you can normally spot an LEO a mile away because of their uniform--and a security guard uniform doesn't look close to any Police/State Trooper/ that I've seen. When I walk into a store that has an LEO inside it at the time, they just normally stick out like a sore thumb. Another thought, if you are using a Fobus type holster, are 99% of criminals going to know how to get the gun out of it? I can see with a standard leather holster that just uses a snap as retention as much easier to get into. But with something like the Fobus you need to know how to draw the gun and it helps to be at the right angle also. Matthew

This is really an unfair statement because OC'ing and being a cop are two entirely different things. First, cops do get attacked, but often after they stop someone or come into a situation. There's not a ton of situations I can think of where the LEO was targeted first when the robber walked into a store. Normally, as I said above, the cop comes INTO the situation, or is trying to stop someone. Second, wearing a uniform is a much bigger sign that you are packing heat than just open carrying. I have been around people OC'ing that it took them 5 mins to even notice that I had a gun on my side. Put that into a store with racks/people/other items in the way and there is a VERY good chance that that the BG would never know you had a firearm. Add into the situation that BG's tend to be more stupid than smart. Plus, inject adrenalin into the situation and the BG tends to be more focused on the goal "get money" than most of what's happening around them. Matthew

BTW, it's not just hitting the silhouette. You have to at least hit the 7 ring to count. However, if you can't do that WITHOUT practice, then you either have a gun with sights that are really far off, or you are the world's worst shot. Even the guy next to me with his tiny snub noise was able to get 100% of the shots within the 7 ring at 15 yards. Oh yeah, and you only have to actually hit either 37 or 38 in the rings, so you have 10 free misses. Really, it's as easy as aim and fire. Matthew

BTW, where is the defense to shooting a gun on someone's property? (with permission.) The 1308 only mentions THE person's property/premises and nothing about other people's property. Or is the law just overlooked? Matthew

Actually, I believe the law says it's illegal to carry a firearm if it's loaded or the ammo is near, plus being concealed--aka: intent to go armed. Really, technically by the law, if a firearm is not concealed and there is no ammo on you/in reach, you have broken no law. It's kinda confusing and here's why. 39-17-1307 says "A person commits an offense who carries with the intent to go armed a firearm." Well, without ammo, it's hard to prove "intent to go armed." I know section 1308 says defense, but without intent to go armed, 1308 doesn't apply as it's not against the law. But when you have ammo in/near the gun since intent to go armed, that's when "defense" kicks in. What's most annoying is that carrying a firearm is a right, but we have laws against it. Driving is NOT a right, but it's easy to get a license and there's not a long section of where you can and can not drive, etc. We really have our laws turned around when it comes to "rights". Matthew

Stop bring logic like this into the argument! I showed the Knoxville City Council that there haven't been any illegal shootings by people with HC/CCW permits in the 31 other states which allow local park carry. But still the argument is that "something" might happen. Something might happen when we serve booze, but we still do it by the gallons each night in Knoxville. Matthew

You are in the mindset that most criminals are smart. That is simply not true. Most really are pretty stupid, at least that's true here in TN. I think for most criminals, it's all about odds. It's been perfectly legal for business owners and employees to carry where booze has been served. However, before the law took place, criminals didn't know if owners would be armed. Now, if they see a no guns sign, I would think that their thinking would be the owners are anti-gun and therefore probably won't be packing. Of course, nothing really seems to stop criminals except when you are able to pull your own gun. Matthew

Hey guys, I was there tonight at the meeting and also spoke. However, after the meeting there were some of us who were talking with Stacy Campfield about the signage issue that was brought. After reading the new law, it looks like the City of Knoxville would still have to post the signs with wording from 39-17-1311©(1). Basically, the law says that if city elects to prohibit carry, they must post. It doesn't say when they have to elect to prohibit (which in this case matters), so the grandfathered law would force them to post. Although, the sign would not be correct in what the crime would be. I really only have one word that accurately describes this issue, "messy." Matthew

BTW, all the meeting is a community forum. The actual vote is almost a month from now. Matthew

JayC is right. They can only totally op-out the park or none of it. This is exactly why all counties/cities need to just be forced to open up ALL the public property to legal carry. Matthew

Okay. I just cannot believe how STUPID people are in this country. I mean, really? Walk with more friends? That way ALL of you can be robbed at the same time? Take a self-defense class? Last time I checked it wasn't that easy to take down a guy with a knife or a gun. In fact, those people who say HCP's don't have enough training obviously don't realize it's easier self-defense if you've got a gun than just your bare hands. If I don't have my gun, and the BG has a knife or a gun, they are going to get whatever I have. That's it. If I've got a gun, then we've got a fair match going on. Gad. What happen to this country? Matthew

Does anyone know if this was in the original TN Constitution? I find it hard to believe that the writers of our Constitution would put something like that considering when the state was founded. Matthew

Except I doubt the park qualifies as a "restaurant" under the law's language. But $500 says they probably have a restaurant license.... Some of our laws are really stupid. Matthew

The law needs to be changed (which actually shouldn't be that hard next session) that it must be the exact wording, except if you ban it on the entire property it says "property" or if you just ban it in a building, it just says "building". How simple can that be? Any other wording is not legal. Matthew

What doesn't make sense is why the other 9 bill of right amendments apply to the states when the 2d one doesn't. So I say if the 2d doesn't apply to the states then here in TN let search the homes of people of people who do not believe the 2d applies. Then arrest them without cause and set $1 billion bond each....because if the 2d is pointless than so is the 4th, 5th, & 8th! Matthew

I really like my Crossbreed Supertuck. It's very comfortable, even with a larger gun. Matthew

Seems like the wording should be updated so people from out of state and people here in state that have carry permits won't be confused. It should say UNLESS you have a handgun carry permit, it's a no no. And yes, carry is legal in state parks now. I just got back from Frozen Head state park and open carried the entire time with no problems. Matthew

Is the place where the Fair is held a city/county park? Because that's not a legal sign otherwise. I saw the same sign last night at the main Knoxville library, but it was inside and not a legal sign. Matthew