Worriedman

As has been stated, Tennessee is an At Will Employment State. They can let you go, you would have to prove wrongful discharge, and even though those suits scare businesses with just their nuisance value, they are hard to win., But, has anyone seen these restaurants closed due to lack of workers. Quality help is very hard to find these days and bidding wars are taking place. I answer as many calls from head hunters as I do from my subs these days. My bunch is not a Mom and Pop, one of the largest of our type in the Southeast. They need my relationships with the Owner Reps and Purchasing agents , we do 75% repeat business. Projects in the triple digit $millions, I am 67 and do not give a lusty crap any more. I have pulled more stuff and gotten by with it than these college children can even imagine. They don't have to fire me I will quit. They cannot cover the jobs we have now and I will not take one more than three hours from the house anymore, will not get on a commercial air liner ever again. 26 years of being their company man, well I don't have to have the aggravation anymore. 17 years ago when my wife's kidneys failed, I had a trip scheduled to Mexico to move a large process manufacturer and had done all the lead up negotiations, they said we would lose the project and would send nurses to my house to take up my slack, remember they provided the insurance...the question of if I would bleed the company colors then was answered as I left her in the hospital and my FIL did not speak to me for 6 months he was so pissed. They sure do not want me going over to one of the clients and being THEIR watchdog. Cut me loose, set me free!

Firm told me to get the vax or hit the road, I said OK, will save you the trouble, I quit. Was on the company plane at the time with about three of my bosses, (have more bosses these days than producers). That simple...they were stunned, I told them to save the fake facts, we just do not see things the same and I was sure they could replace 26 years of Process Construction experience with one of the college boys, no problem. I had food plots to plant. Owner called later that day and said since I had recouped from it in October last year it would not be a condition of my continued employment. When enough people push back it will stop, if they don't it wont.

SB 1148 passed the Senate this morning on partisan grounds, 26-5. All that remains is Governor's signature, becomes law July1, 2021.

SB 1148 is up for consideration on the Floor of the Senate tomorrow 4/27/21. I would ask that all who are interested call your Senator's Offices today!

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20210421/tennessee-pro-self-defense-measure-heads-to-the-senate-floor?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ila_alert

I believe the term is "take what we can get"... I agree, however this is a pretty big step forward. It flew under the radar and as as such did not get a lot of scrutiny, or, it would have been killed. Plus we had some friends who pushed back against the attempt to kill it. There are good people in the House, the Senate is a whole 'nuther help line. We did get did get this one through though and I am grateful. This bill mandates that the criminal charge has to be settled before a civil case can move forward, and if there was no crime, no civil suit can proceed. As it stands now you have to prove your innocence to get a chance to recoup your legal expenses. NO LE agency is going to help you do that, they have a hard enough time trying to prove guilt on criminals. And by the way, no mention currently about lost wages, jobs or divorce, or the necessity to plea one caste (criminal or civil) to afford to fight the other or, the use of that plea to facilitate a decision on the remaining one. This is a big deal for self defense...

SB 1148 made it out of Senate Judiciary tonight, finally. Should pass full Senate, just not sure what day it will be up.

Video of the Presentation in Full committee.

We had a number of Democrats vote yes. When they do right I tell them thank you.

The Elder gentleman (Tom Tigue) that for years we the go to Attorney at the legislature suggested that 39-11-611 needed to be cleaned up as the older language in our self defense Statue said if you were not engaged in criminal activity as a limiting factor, but jay walking and parked on the wrong side of the street are actually crimes...this cleans it up. Will it make it out, I do not know, but it should. If Rep. Beck does not like it, it is a good thing normally. https://studio.youtube.com/video/4sGGa2sge1A/edit

Has to do with Fiscal Review, Todd's bill would have gone behind the budget if it had been run prior to the Governor's bill being passed, which has the $2.5 or so in lost revenue covered, so now this second bill can not be killed simply over money. It has to be killed on the merits. Watch Leader Lambert's comment on 1388 in Criminal Sub yesterday, done correctly he said, and, he appreciated it being vetted in committee instead of as an amendment on the floor, (where Todd had one there that did exactly the same thing). I do not think it has a chance of making it out of Full Criminal Justice, but it would be really nice if it did, just to get a count of votes on the floor. Gamesmanship! Here is the presentation of that clean up bill

You are correct, even they did not realize it, the whole thing is hard to keep up with, but you are 100% correct. That is going to be a problem from magistrates in Davidson and Shelby county reading it that their take is that any park requires a permit to be legally present, we will need a AG's opinion for those areas.

There is a "clean up" bill still moving, though I hold no hope it will make it out of full Criminal Justice, though it did pass Criminal sub yesterday, HB 1388 by Todd, would simply take away the criminal aspect of 1307 and do away with 1308, and now that the Governor's bill has passed there is no fiscal note. You can measure your Rep. and Senators by how they =treat this one.

Leader Lambert's office told me they substituted the Senate version for his House bill for final consideration, the screen shot shows that from their website, but I am sure you are correct.

From the Bill: The defendant's use of force or threatened use of force was justified and permitted by §§ 39-11-611 – 39-11-614 or § 29-34-201; 611 covers deadly force, it is all good.

Of note, still in Tennessee: Carrying any sort of weapon for offense or defense in public, (Going armed), is a crime. As good as the recently passed Permitless Carry Bill is in Tennessee, that Code Section has not been touched, and remains a blot on the soul of Tennessee with respect to the original intent of our Founding. You now have exceptions, exemptions or defenses if you meet certain criteria tied to the permit system, but the criminal aspect of one’s leaving their personal property with a loaded firearm still exist. In 44 states, openly carrying a long gun is legal. Of these states, Iowa, Tennessee, and Utah require that the long gun is unloaded. Virginia and Pennsylvania limit openly carrying long guns in certain cities. These States (or wanabe States) pretty much prohibit openly carry of long guns: California, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota and New Jersey. Tennessee’s prescription against the carry of a loaded long gun is listed in TCA 39-17-1307 (17) which states: “Unloaded means the rifle, shotgun or handgun does not have ammunition in the chamber, cylinder, clip or magazine, and no clip or magazine is in the immediate vicinity of the weapon". Need to get that if you have NO ammo but do have a stripper clip, clip or magazine you are guilty of carrying a loaded firearm. Andy Griffith at least allowed Barney one bullet…(yes, I know it was for a handgun)

If there is a plan by the district, they must still have and Enhanced permit to do so: § 49-6-815. Possession of firearms on school grounds; persons allowed; notice (a) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1309 or any other provision of title 39, chapter 17, part 13 to the contrary, the following people are permitted to possess and carry a firearm on the grounds of the school at which they are assigned: (1) A person employed by an LEA as a faculty or staff member at a school within the LEA; or (2) A person assigned to a school in accordance with a memorandum of understanding between the chief of the appropriate law enforcement agency and the LEA. (b) In order to possess and carry a firearm on the grounds of the school pursuant to subsection (a), the person must: (1) Be authorized to possess and carry a firearm pursuant to § 39-17-1351; § 49-6-816. Possession of firearms on school grounds in distressed rural counties; persons authorized; notice (a) As used in this section: (1) “Distressed rural county” means any county that qualifies as an “eligible county” under § 67-6-104, for the apportionment of sales and use tax revenue for commercial development districts, and has a population of not less than seventeen thousand (17,000) nor more than seventeen thousand one hundred (17,100), or a population of not less than five thousand (5,000) nor more than five thousand one hundred (5,100), according to the 2010 federal census or any subsequent federal census; and (2) “Employee” means a person employed full time to work in a public kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) school, including as a teacher, principal, vice principal, or other staff member. (b) (1) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1309 or any other provision of title 39, chapter 17, part 13, to the contrary, in addition to persons who are authorized to possess a firearm on school property under any other law, the local board of education in a distressed rural county may adopt a policy allowing the director of schools, in consultation with the principal of each school, to authorize and select employees who may carry a concealed handgun within and on the grounds of the school to which the person is assigned. (2) If the director of schools authorizes one (1) or more employees to carry a concealed handgun as provided in subdivision (b)(1), the maximum number of employees that may be authorized is one (1) employee for each one hundred (100) students enrolled in the school. (c) No employee shall be disciplined or otherwise suffer adverse employment consequences if the employee does not volunteer to be trained to carry a concealed handgun pursuant to this section. (d) (1) The director of schools shall not select an employee to carry a concealed handgun pursuant to this section unless the employee: (A) Possesses and maintains a valid handgun carry permit issued by this state pursuant to § 39-17-1351; § 49-50-803. Handgun carry policy (Private schools) (a)(1) The board or governing entity of each private K-12 school, or the chief administrative officer if the school does not have a board or governing entity, may establish a handgun carry policy for any property on which the school is located that is owned or operated by the school and for any building or structure located on the school property. (2) Any handgun carry policy adopted by the board or governing entity, or the chief administrative officer when appropriate, may: (A) Prohibit the carrying or possession of a handgun on the property of, or in a building located at, the private school; (B) Permit the carrying of handguns by persons qualified under subsection (b) on all property constituting the campus of the school and in all buildings owned or operated by the school; or (C) Permit the carrying of handguns by persons qualified under subsection (b) in certain areas on the property of the school or in certain buildings, but prohibit the carrying in other areas or buildings. (b) If the board or governing entity, or the chief administrative officer when appropriate, permits the possession of handguns in accordance with this section at the private school, the following rules and limitations shall apply: (1) No person who is otherwise prohibited from possessing a handgun is permitted to carry a handgun on private school property; (2) The person must have a valid Tennessee handgun carry permit, pursuant to § 39-17-1351; and (3) No private institution that permits the possession of handguns on the property owned or operated by the institution pursuant to this section shall be required to post signs as required by § 39-17-1309(d). A couple of other issues, bow hunting or being on Wildlife Refuges: § 70-4-123. Bow and arrow hunting; possession of firearm; crimes and offenses (a) It is unlawful for any person hunting big game with a bow and arrow to be in possession of any firearms or be accompanied in hunting by any person possessing firearms during the archery-only deer season; provided, that persons authorized to carry a handgun pursuant to § 39-17-1351 may carry a handgun as defined in § 39-11-106(a) while hunting big game with a bow and arrow during the archery-only deer season. (b) A person who violates this section commits a Class C misdemeanor. § 70-4-117. Weapons; big game habitat; crimes and offenses; handgun carry permit (a) It is unlawful for any person to be in possession of any firearm, bow and arrow, shotgun or rifle in, on, or while traversing any refuge, public hunting area or wildlife management area frequented or inhabited by big game, except during specified or lawful open seasons on these areas. Any person violating this section is guilty of hunting big game and shall be punished as provided for in subsections (b) and (c). (b) (1) A violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor. (2) It is mandatory upon the court to impose the prison sentence, upon conviction for a second or subsequent offense, and the prison sentence is not subject to suspension. (c) In the prosecution of a second or subsequent offense, the indictment or presentment must allege the prior conviction for violating any of the provisions of this section, setting forth the time and place of each such prior conviction. The court shall prohibit such convicted person, either a first or subsequent offender, from hunting, fishing or trapping in this state for a period of one (1) year. (d) Notwithstanding subsection (a), a person with a handgun carry permit pursuant to § 39-17-1351 may possess a handgun the entire year while on the premises of any refuge, public hunting area, wildlife management area or, to the extent permitted by federal law, national forest land maintained by the state. Nothing in this subsection (d) shall authorize a person to use any handgun to hunt unless the person is in full compliance with all wildlife laws, rules and regulations. (e) Nothing in this section shall authorize a person with a hand gun carry permit to possess such weapon in the portion of any refuge, public hunting area or wildlife management area that is within the boundaries of a state park or state natural area unless otherwise authorized in accordance with state law. (f) Nothing in this section shall authorize a person to access any area unless the person is in full compliance with all current wildlife laws, rules, proclamations and regulations. These are small pockets of problems out of the myriad of codes but it might get handled by an AG's opinion to just clear it up. Overall the permitless carry is a good thing and just needs tidying up.

I know you are correct and stated so in my post, but would reiterate, what does that have to do with Tennessee. That is the Tri Star on his graphic, which was not a State at that point, he is insinuating it is a Tennessee date, but that is nitpicking I guess, the long guns are the kicker...maybe a brace of pistols would have better represented the facts.

The actual language passed was the Senate version (not arguing, just stating the facts) and it reverts to the older language "Where you have a Right to be" Leader Lamberth tried to insert the "Legally present" in the House version but the Senate would not accept it so he moved the Senate version of the bill. There are in fact federal laws which allow those who were precluded from possession due to mental issues who could, if those matters are medically corrected and that is expunged from their records federally who can not regain their Rights under this provision. That will most likely be addressed nest year if someone challenges it.

And do not forget, to have reciprocity with many States you still have to have a permit, TFA never suggested to do away with permits, that has always been the straw man of the moderates/liberals, loss of revenue. Also I would like to see an Attorney General ruling to see if the new permitless carry allows carry by a non permit holder where the permitted is allowed, I fear many will think that is the case and get in trouble for that lack of specific knowledge, let's just get that ruling so we all know.

I find this interesting, pasted on a Legislators FB page. I would interested in were he got the date mentioned for Tennessee, and the long guns, I think not. Constitution of the Union was ratified in 1788, and TN became a State in 1796? Bill of rights was ratified by Virginia on that date but what does it have to do with a non-existent State?

I think we should have gun safety training in grade school. too may children are never around any instruction with regard to firearms, as opposed to most of us old hands that, TFA supported that bill in the House it got killed quickly. Take some of that money they are collection and not spending to fix our roads and have those at least as elective classes as well in secondary schools.

It is what we asked for this year, see Todd's bill HB 1388 written by us and parsed through legal, simply removes the criminal aspect, it is up this week in subcommittee. I get the game. I work a 60 hr. week, have a daughter that is wheelchair bound that I have to see about constantly, a wife who had a kidney transplant 13 years ago and is very ill, and another daughter that just had her transplant...spontaneous mutation that got passed along to our kids that we did not know about when young and fertile. I use my vacation to travel to Nashville and now can do Zoom meetings with our friends in the legislature, the only upside to COVID I have found. I will rest when I am dead. Per the fundraising, we only spend money on helping good candidates in their campaigns and advertising for our issues. John donated copious hours at no payback of any sort to the effort. There are two Board members, he and I, and neither of us take a penny from the TFA, ever! I nor John are Wayne La Pierre. I agree we are not enemies, we just have different views on how to proceed. I have enough brown on my nose from my efforts over the last 20+ years to start a small truck patch...

That is disingenuous, working the bills is not shown on the video stream, I got 72 yes votes for my bill, the Governor's bill got 64. I am simply telling the facts of the game that is played. How many days have you spent working 2nd Amendment issues at the General Assembly? How many meeting did you attend in Nashville with groups of legislators to actually write bills and advocate with Leadership to seek their passage. I have spent two decades involved in the effort. Employee Safe Commute, Guns in Trunks, Guns in Bars and Guns in Parks, all issues that leadership fought that TFA championed and worked to pass, a lot of shoe leather and groveling spent, I saw very VERY few others doing that work. Here is what Senator Kerry Roberts said about the issue, and yes he also said he would support the bill as written, but these comments bear witness I think. https://youtu.be/4tRXSSBP3cw