GKar

Another interesting turn: I spoke to a TVA police officer who indicated that TVA properties are not affected by the recent changes in either Federal law (Coburn amendment) or state law(s). He indicated that those TVA properties currently posted as "No firearms" will continue to be posted, and carry by HCP holders will not be allowed. He also indicated that those TVA properties that are not specifically posted will continue to allow carry, as they have previously (access areas, etc). Dang, talk about needing a map....

Yes, I have little hope of changing the outcome. Previous experience suggests that, when a resolution makes it to this agenda, it has already been decided upon.

I see City Council has posted their agenda for tomorrow night's (July 7) meeting. Resolution 09-69 - banning firearms from local parks. A little research indicates that, as of May '09, there were approx 1000 HCP holders in Bristol. No one on council appears to hold an HCP ( surprise, surprise!). Guess I'll make an appearance, trying to at least speak a little common sense into the meeting minutes.

Not a big surprise...a college town with the expected concentration of liberal egg-heads. What was interesting is that they did this with virtually no media notice.

Precisely the reason for the wording of my original question as posed to CNF personnel - knowing that WMA status is still a bit "up in the air", I was hoping to get a glimpse of what the field may/not know about the areas that should be clearer (ie, pertinent legislation for non-WMA areas having cleared all legislative hurdles). Hopeful of more, but expecting pretty much what I got. Still no response (return call) from the LEO. I've tried to communicate with a CNF LEO on one previous occasion a year or so ago, with similarly productive results. Your point RE studying and understanding the regulations is indeed a valid one; particularly so for those seemingly charged with enforcement of those regs. My professional life is spent trying to stay abreast of and understanding regulations promulgated in the CFR in an effort to be prepared to guide my business through the ensuing regulatory quagmire...no greater frustration occurs than when the regulators are less versed in the regulations than the regulated, which leads to "I'll enforce it the way I read it, even though my colleague in the next office does it differently."

Interesting. As written, the provisions within the cited portions of the CFR would seem to be specific to the closure of certain roads, trails, and areas within a park, as opposed to the prohibition of certain acts (ie, carrying a firearm) on those roads, trails and areas. But then again, the wording of a rule has never stood in the way of a quasi-regulator with an agenda...particularly when no one is looking over his/her shoulder. It seems best that I cool my heels and wait for TWRA to react to HB 0961, then once again approach CNF. EDIT: Looks like it has been sent to the governor's desk. So, unless he decides to sgn it quickly (no money on that bet), we are probably looking at something very close to July 14 as an effective date (July 1 +10, adding in the holiday and Sundays.) Anybody know a good restaurant in a WMA?

Signed by Sen. Speaker today (6/30). Had an interesting conversation with a couple of Cherokee NF folks...I asked about current enforcement status for handgun carry by a holder of a valid TN HCP in any area of CNF in Tennessee and NOT in a WMA. The first person seemed unsure what a WMA was, and referred me to another. This second person told me that this was a national forest and that state law changes didn't apply, and they were looking to national parks for guidance (?!?!?!?) I suggested that my understanding differed, and asked if she could point me to a clarifying document. She then indicated that she was just going by "what her notes said", and that she would need to refer me to one of their two LEOs, both of whom were out of the office. I left a voice message, and am still awaiting a return call. The lesson here is an important one - do not expect that the field personnel will be up-to-date on these recent changes, and do not expect that they will be either interested in nor receptive to hearing about them (these folks sure weren't).

Hello and welcome!

Just last weel, a local resident saw a stranger enter his camper parked in his yard. He went back into his house to retrieve his gun, surprised the young intruder while the kid was still inside his camper, and held him at gunpoint until the police ariived (several minutes later). So far, no indication that the homeowner/camper owner will be charged with any offense.

Good news. I wonder if an enterprising legal sort could construct an argument that any type of resolution or public stance espoused by a city council, mayor etc in their official position could be construed as an attempt to "discriminate against", in that such a statement coming from the same official body that otherwise regulates sale of beer, wine etc carries undue weight due to implied repercussions...

When my wife and I step across the state line into Virginia (300 yards from my house), we can carry into any restaurant - alcohol or not - as long as its "open" carry. And folks do - Chili's, Red Lobster, Logan's, etc. And strangely enough, there are no problems at all... what is it about Tennessee residents that some in government think is so different that we cannot be trusted to behave like the rest of the nation?

Fallguy is correct. From TWRA's website FAQ section: With a handgun carry permit, can a person legally carry a weapon on a WMA at all times? No. However, handguns can be possessed when they are legal for hunting. So, HB 0961 is the integral piece of the puzzle to eliminating this prohibition, since it specifically targets WMAs.

My understanding mirrors your last paragraph - the WMA restriction comes from and is enforced by TWRA, not the NFS. Any part of Cherokee NF that is not WMA would be open to carry under the new law - but I'm not sure that there is very much, if any, of the forest that's not WMA. I know virtually all of it up here in the Holston Mtn area is WMA. The good news - its on the Senate FWM agenda (along with 66 other items) for today, and FWM is scheduled to meet at 10am. Assuming passage in FWM (surely!!!), it should be sent to the Senate Floor for the 1pm floor sesson today - unless it has to make a stop in the Calendar committee first. If they proceed like the House did yesterday, they can convene Calendar immediately after FWM, sort what goes to consent calendar and what doesn't in what sounds like an auction session, then get on with the floor session. Really hope they get this last piece done - we do a lot of hiking, camping and geocaching around Holston Mtn, and the black bear and feral dog activity has been particularly abundant of late.

For those of us in the Eastern end of the state, it is very significant - the vast, vast majority of Cherokee NF is also WMA, and thus remains closed to legal carry until the WMA bill passes.

As of this afternoon, it is showing as on the agenda for 6/17 in the Senate Finance, Ways and Means comittee...which is not scheduled to meet on 6/17, or any other date this session.

http://www.tennessee.gov/attorneygeneral/op/2009/OP/OP118.pdf

A legislator told me last week that the state had been processing an average of over 10,000 HCP permit applications a month since November. Sounds like our sources had similar sources...

Just recently purchased a .45 Micro-Compact, which I believe is essentially the .45 version of the EMP. 300 rounds later, I'm still loving it. Nary a problem yet, shooting Blazer and WWB FMJ, and Win SXT/Hornady HPs. Very manageable, very attractive, very accurate...and fun!

IIRC, Sen. Bunch was not counted as present at roll call

69-27 to override!

Here we go!

Good - the water bill is the most dangerous bill he's seen to date! How do these people find their way home at night?

My response to the email from my newly-found "friend" in the governor's office: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Guns and alcohol don't mix - that truism has been oft-quoted in relation to this bill, but it always seem to be missing a vital part (as is your reasoning below). More properly, it should be stated that "guns and consuming alcohol don't mix". If you meant to say "guns and proximity to alcohol don't mix", I would have to point you to the current legal situation in Tennessee and myriad other states where carry permit holders are allowed to possess firearms when in stores and other establishments that sell alcohol off-premises: a situation that the available data strongly suggests is not problematic in any regard. HB0962 contains an absolute requirement that the carry permit holder cannot consume alcohol while in possession of a firearm. You and others conveniently leave out that recognition, nor have you addressed how that prohibition is in your eyes inadequate - instead, you seem much more comfortable with the more gutteral and very inaccurate generalism that initiates this response. It may play well in the media, but upon scrutiny it is revealed to be a woefully inept attempt at justification for your action. At no time have you or the much-ballyhooed "law enforcement professionals" (the ambitious, politically-driven component of the law enforcement community that appeared with you in your grandstanding announcement of the veto, as opposed to the truly operative component of that community to whom we owe so very much) made recognition of the reality that Tennessee is in the vast minority of states with regards to this regulation, nor have you or they pointed out how the data from those states' experiences compares with that from Tennessee history - could it be that this validation of your position does not, in actuality, exist? Perhaps you believe that we, your constituents, are not capable of assimilating such a comparison - let me assure you that would be a false assumption. Indeed, we are not only quite capable of understanding it, but are also capable of seeing through the lack of your efforts to provide same in defense of your position. We are also quite capable of thinking for ourselves, and not depending on our governor to play the role of benevolent overseer, lookingt for our best intersts when in reality our voice was previously heard through our duly elected legislators. Sir, I am disappointed with you, and frankly appalled at your lack of integrity as demonstrated by your lame attempt to explain this very transparent, politically-motivated decision. I hope you enjoy your future position in the Obama administration to which you so most obviously aspire. ------------------------------------------------------------------

From Rep. Mumpower: ------------------------------- Thanks for your e-mail. As you requested, I will vote to override the Governor's veto of House Bill 962. I appreciate your dedication to protecting our 2nd Amendment rights as Tennesseans and Americans. Thanks, Jason ------------------------------------- Gotta admit,the word "will" is comforting.

I'd actually spoken with Lt. Gov. Ramsey after church two weeks ago concerning the status of this bill, as well as parks carry. At the time, he felt everything was in good shape with both....and I can certainly vouch for the fact that he is an ardent supporter of this legislation! Emailed Rep. Mumpower, haven't heard back yet, but pretty certain all is well there.