Worriedman

There will be no suit, the department has qualified immunity.

This goes to having to prove “good cause” for carrying a weapon one one's person. Subjective filter for the Police State to deny the Citizen's who they supposed serve to be forced to be a target sans allowing a Constitutional Right to be enjoyed. Statist got to State...

http://www.al.com/news/huntsville/index.ssf/2017/06/mo_brooks_tells_fox_he_will_in.html From the article: "Mo Brooks tells Fox he will introduce bill allowing lawmakers to be armed"

Have your personal weapon in your bat bag, not like you would expect another Representative to filch your goods...I have started wearing my sidearm when I bush hog or mow. I shoot more and clean more now...

What are the chances that the Senate and House pass a bill saying any legislator who can legally possess a firearm will be given honorary LEOSA like privileges? http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/15/shooting-spurs-calls-for-new-lawmaker-security-measures.html From the article: "Rep. Thomas Massie, R-K.Y., took calls for additional security a step further on Thursday by re-introducing legislation that would allow those who have concealed carry permits in their home states to carry in Washington D.C."

Why would they want to do that, if the Hearing Protection Act and Constitutional Carry were to become the law, what would they use to fund raise off of?

Becoming more the norm every day, as the Nation sees how crime and terrorism is developing, I think the realization that for a short period each individual MUST be responsible for the production of their own safety, you will see the population become more armed, ar at least the smart ones who wish to survive will.

Every person who took up arms in the Revolt were criminals as construed by the legitimate government of the day. All of them were considered the "right stuff" by Washington, Jefferson, Coxe and Mason, e.g. "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426) The "militia" was to be the antithesis of the "Standing Army" which to the thinking of our Founders was a dangerous thing. TN 1796 Constitution Article 11 Section 24th : That the sure and certain defence of a free people is a well-regulated militia; and as standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to freedom, they ought to be avoided, as far as the circumstances and safety of the community will admit, and that in all cases the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil authority. Respecting who could own arms then, Article 11 Section 26th: That the free men of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defence. Nothing about background checks or non-criminals, just free men. As we are no longer free, but slavish per Article 1 Section 2nd: That, government being instituted for the common benefit, the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive to the good and happiness of mankind. We have allowed the government to institute arbitrary rules and oppress us. I have nothing but respect for our Service men and women, and our Police, but choosing that as a job should not give special Rights to bear arms, being "fit" for military service should not be, and is not a requirement to provide protection of one's home or person.

"Well regulated" means to be in proper order, to be calibrated correctly, or in the case of Militias, to be practiced and effective. It has nothing whatsoever to do with government oversight, in fact it is the absolute opposite of that in its 2nd Amendment meaning, intending the "government" powerless to regulate the keeping and bearing of arms specifically. From the period: In 1623, Virginia forbade its colonists to travel unless they were "well armed"; in 1631 it required colonists to engage in target practice on Sunday and to "bring their peeces to church." In 1658 it required every householder to have a functioning firearm within his house and in 1673 its laws provided that a citizen who claimed he was too poor to purchase a firearm would have one purchased for him by the government, which would then require him to pay a reasonable price when able to do so. In Massachusetts, the first session of the legislature ordered that not only freemen, but also indentured servants own firearms and in 1644 it imposed a stern 6 shilling fine upon any citizen who was not armed.- U.S., Congress, Senate, "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms," Report of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary, p. 3. Noah Webster wrote "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe." George Mason told the Virginia delegates the the Monarch's endeavor "to disarm the people; that [that] . . . was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." and he is quoted in saying "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." Tench Coxe, corresponding with James Madison, described the Second Amendment's overriding goal as a check upon the national government's standing army: "As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." and "Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an Americans." I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials. Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_mason.html I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials. Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_mason.html

They are still going to do background checks on you, you just paid for them up front.

This my friends is what we have with respect to Statesmen in positions of power in the TN GA.

All it takes is the Chairman of the Civil Justice committee to be under her control (every Chairman is under her control, else they would not be Chairmen) to keep these bills off the House floor. And, the majority of the House voted to elect her, so they must be in agreement with her wishes, or, afraid to buck her. Either way, she rules...

That has been answered three years in a row!

As long as the Republicans are in a supermajority situation in Tennessee, it will never happen. Our State government with respect to these issues, is controlled by the Chamber of Commerce and the Sheriff's Association, neither organization is in favor of granting that loss of control from the Police State, neither believes in individual responsibility.

We do not have enough special classes of Tennesseans yet...(sarc off) By the way, does that entitle all these additional folks to run for Sheriff now that they are POST Certified under the Sheriff for life bill?

What law is enforced that keeps a criminal from illegally purchasing a gun, or stealing one and using it to commit a crime? Stewart proves that straw purchases (his offer to sell the weapon shows his intent and he should be prosecuted for that action, political grandstanding notwithstanding) can and do subvert the "background check" system. Who do we hold responsible when these laws fail to keep criminals from having and using guns, we pay an ungodly amount of our property to a government who advertises "To Protect and Serve" yet when some criminal who has been adjudicated dangerous and let out of incarceration to practice his skill set again injures the public, does the public have recourse? The government has qualified immunity when they fail in the fiduciary responsibility to their employers. Simple fix, allow anyone to access the TICS system, it is a phone call and driver's license number, give them a credit card number for the $10.00 problem solved. (We are paying the people who run it already, if the aim is to restrict the sale of firearms to criminals, I think this is a reasonable us of our employees) If a legislator wants to reduce sales of firearms to criminals, pass legislation to give all the ability to check, then drop the hammer on anyone who sells to a criminal if they can prove it.

I hit the bricks this morning at 4:00 headed to Mississippi and worked all day, and drove back to Jackson tonight to take care of my 90 year old Father"s meds, I just buried my Father-in-law last weekend, Navy man from WWII, and I expect my Father to join him in the next few weeks. I am a 63 year Senior Project Manager with a very sick wife who uses up his vacation to advocate for firearms issues. I do not get my gas paid for, nor any recompense for my efforts. I deal with these folks denying the People their Rights for the three months they are on our dole stealing our money and drinking our tax payer funded liquor, kissing there rears and trying to get my grandchildren as well situated as I can. Normally I am the only advocate for these issues in the house. I am too tired to be insulted, and I rightly do not care what you throw at me because I do all I humanly can and that is a lot more than most.

I suggest you spend some time at the legislature watching these miscreants wallow in the mire that is the General Assembly. As this is a gun forum, I tend to keep my thoughts regarding fiscal and other issues to myself, I do get involved, but I find other venues to engage those trials and opinions in.

Did I say he had? You mentioned the fact that he was all that with regard to being in the military, I reflected that so was Benedict Arnold, or more precisely I said we should not forget that he was all that too. My point was that one can be in the military (and be a lawyer to your point, like that is some grand achievement) and still not truly support the restoration of our Rights to Arms. When I call someone something I do it with clarity, there are many instances here of me calling the Establishment Republicans feckless, lying worms, and I am not coy with my descriptions... What has Stewart ever done to restore the original intent of the Tennessee Constitution with respect to our arms and our ability to keep bear and wear them, his stellar service record and having passed the bar notwithstanding?

Whose, Mike Stewart's or Benedict Arnold's? To my knowledge there are no conservative Democrats left in the GA now that Eddie Bass, Ben West and Doug Jackson are gone, more is the pity...

If they realized the intent was to insert the government into their ability to pass that shotgun on to a grand child sans Big Brother's nose being inserted they might. I still say that we need to include cars, and why not houses into background checks territory?

Let's not forget Benedict Arnold...he was all about the People and good governance as well.

I know, let's require background checks on drivers of automobiles, big 'ol honking weapons (as shown recently by jihadist). Surely if one needs precluding from possessing and operations a firearm they shoul likewise be denied the chance to plow over others with magnum motors and wheels...

But, our General Assembly is the most Gun friendly in the nation, just ask Mike Carter...

This is simply to remove the requirement of having the tax stamp IF the Feds implement a reversal of suppressors from the NFA, as it stands,the stamp is required as a defense against prosecution. If he Feds chhange the rating, sans this action you still could not legally posses a silencer without the fed stamp. Not intended to subvert fed late, but to compliment something that may be coming.