Worriedman

  If there is public money spent on the parking lot, (and in 99% of the factories being built today anywhere, there is a LOT of public, e.g. tax money being spent on the construction of facilities for industry) it is in fact, quasi-public property.   Case in point, Hemlock in Clarksville, millions of dollars of State tax money spent on the purchase of land and infrastructure production, and yet they acted like it was "private property".  Every "Big" employer that comes into TN now is plied with bribes from the public treasury, but so many tout their "Private Property' Rights. I have many times before asked this question, and will again, what Constitutional protection of private property exist in TN?  The only text relating to private property I can find Constitutionally, explains how a group of your peers can take anything you possesses, (including your life) from you if they feel it in the best interest of the community, on a State, County, or City level.

Not that I always agree with Hamilton, (or even usually), but even he gets it to a major degree, Federalist #33 para. #5:   “If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard [the Constitution] they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify.” [emphasis mine] Remember in the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.   The People, still have a place, and a responsibility in our governance, if they would just get off their arses and exercise it.    

  6.8, you are wise beyond your years, and like me, you have a few miles on you already, so that makes you a pretty smart fellow!

Don't forget our own dear leaders, Brian Kelsy, John Stephens, Lowe Finney, Jim Coley, and Vance Dennis...

Only if the laws under consideration are couched in the Constitution.  If the Federal law under consideration is unconstitutional, (in the opinion of many States) then the States have the ability to question such instruments, and together to petition the SCOTUS for a ruling.   Dred Scott comes to mind as a reading of law that was upheld at one point Federally, but ultimately decided to be unconstitutional.

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2013/may/08/desjarlais-benghazi-hearing-about-finding-the/   Another fine example of Sen. Corker and how he views the world, and his responsibility to Tennessee, from the article:    

I thought Naifeh was a student of Gov. John Brown's, (as he fought hard to keep firearms out of the hands of the average individual), much as Brown did when he oversaw the re-writing of our State Constitution as the Democrat in charge of that operation.  Maybe Naifeh has not been around that long, it just seems like he was...

No, I meant 1870, referencing such bad law as the "Intent to go armed" clause, and giving themselves the power to regulate the wearing of arms, which never existed prior to that date (and we survived very well as a State without that added little bonus thank you very much).  If today's legislators would simply work on repealing unconstitutional law passed by their predecessors, they would not have to "admit" to being a bunch of money grubbing spineless power hungry cretins.  The crack about Naifeh was evidently a bad attempt at humor...

No they are not wavering, they are going about their business of reducing Liberty and Freedom apace.  SOP.

  Somehow, I get the feeling Bailout wasn't really working hard to change the President's mind, it was after all a day of free golf...

He could have, but I bet he didn't.

  I was thinking more like going back to some bad laws passed in 1870, and since Naifeh quit before he got his hinney handed to him, I don't there is anybody left that was there then...

Could they not busy themselves in repealing current bad law?

I believe that the basis of the laws in TN and FL are vastly different.  It is my understanding that employers in FL may not have a "policy" in their handbooks:   (4) PROHIBITED ACTS.—No public or private employer may violate the constitutional rights of any customer, employee, or invitee as provided in paragraphs (a)-(e): (a) No public or private employer may prohibit any customer, employee, or invitee from possessing any legally owned firearm when such firearm is lawfully possessed and locked inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot and when the customer, employee, or invitee is lawfully in such area.  [b]     No public or private employer may violate the privacy rights of a customer, employee, or invitee by verbal or written inquiry regarding the presence of a firearm inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot or by an actual search of a private motor vehicle in a parking lot to ascertain the presence of a firearm within the vehicle. Further, no public or private employer may take any action against a customer, employee, or invitee based upon verbal or written statements of any party concerning possession of a firearm stored inside a private motor vehicle in a parking lot for lawful purposes. A search of a private motor vehicle in the parking lot of a public or private employer to ascertain the presence of a firearm within the vehicle may only be conducted by on-duty law enforcement personnel, based upon due process and must comply with constitutional protections.  [c]   No public or private employer shall condition employment upon either: 1. The fact that an employee or prospective employee holds or does not hold a license issued pursuant to s. 790.06; or 2. Any agreement by an employee or a prospective employee that prohibits an employee from keeping a legal firearm locked inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot when such firearm is kept for lawful purposes. (d) No public or private employer shall prohibit or attempt to prevent any customer, employee, or invitee from entering the parking lot of the employer’s place of business because the customer’s, employee’s, or invitee’s private motor vehicle contains a legal firearm being carried for lawful purposes, that is out of sight within the customer’s, employee’s, or invitee’s private motor vehicle. (e) No public or private employer may terminate the employment of or otherwise discriminate against an employee, or expel a customer or invitee for exercising his or her constitutional right to keep and bear arms or for exercising the right of self-defense as long as a firearm is never exhibited on company property for any reason other than lawful defensive purposes. This subsection applies to all public sector employers, including those already prohibited from regulating firearms under the provisions of s. 790.33.   Exemptions:   (7) EXCEPTIONS.—The prohibitions in subsection (4) do not apply to: (a) Any school property as defined and regulated under s. 790.115. [b]     Any correctional institution regulated under s. 944.47 or chapter 957. [c] Any property where a nuclear-powered electricity generation facility is located. (d) Property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which are conducted substantial activities involving national defense, aerospace, or homeland security. (e) Property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials regulated under state or federal law, or property owned or leased by an employer who has obtained a permit required under 18 U.S.C. s. 842 to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials on such property. (f) A motor vehicle owned, leased, or rented by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer. (g) Any other property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which possession of a firearm or other legal product by a customer, employee, or invitee is prohibited pursuant to any federal law, contract with a federal government entity, or general law of this state.   Vastly different from the law in TN.  

As of July 1, 2008, Florida became a "Take your gun to work" state (F.S. 790.251). This law prohibits most businesses from firing any employee with a Concealed Weapon License for keeping a legal firearm locked in their vehicle in the company parking lot. The purpose of the new law is to allow carry licensees to exercise their Second Amendment rights during their commutes to and from work. Exceptions listed in F.S. 790.251(7) include: school property; correctional institutions; property where a nuclear-powered electricity generation facility is located; property upon which substantial activities involving national defense, aerospace, or homeland security are conducted; property upon which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials; a motor vehicle owned/leased/rented by your employer; any other property upon which possession of a firearm is prohibited pursuant to any federal law, contract with a federal government entity, or general law of Florida. A case was filed against Disney by Edwin Sotomayor, a former Disney security guard who was fired, despite having a CWL, for having a firearm locked in his car, in violation of Disney's pre-existing no weapons allowed policy. The case was later dropped by the plaintiff citing personal and financial reasons. Disney claims that they are exempt from the new state law, on the basis of their having a fireworks license for conducting nightly fireworks shows at Disney World If you have enough bucks, you can carve out your own rules.   http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.251.html

I believe that is a lie, at least in TN.  Seeing the number of first time gun owners (many of them young women, and many older folks who fear for their safety) perfecting their HCPs here, I think the media is cooking the books, or...   they are betting on the come for confiscation in New York, California and the like to reduce the number of house holds bereft of weapons at some future point. Do I think the government or the drive by media would lie, uh yeah.

I have not been made aware that it "targeted Middle TN". It was made available to all the contacts of the organization in TN State-wide.

I drive an average of 100K a year. (lots and lots of that from West TN to Nashville, is Southwest EVER going to start flying out of Memphis?)   I leave in plenty of time to make my flight if I have a flat tire or two, if every set of semis I encounter are slow racing (my pet peeve) or there is a wreck that flat stops traffic. I no longer have any feelings that can be hurt, and I do not get angry at idiots, it would only shorten my life span to allow the other person to dictate how I act or react.  I keep my vehicles in top shape, I run a little over the speed limit and will drive away from trouble or stop and have a cup of coffee if it seems I need to allow some idiot time to get on up the road and away from me.  I try to keep several car lengths of clear road between me and the nearest bumper, to no avial usually, as there seems to be this axiom about nature (and driver's) abhorring a void...

  From my point of view, it cost me a lot more than my driver's license, (I like getting value for my dollars spent) is far superior in its validity, (background check and all that) and up until this last week was never challenged.  It also is listed as a valid form of ID, so why not?

Mr. Reyes (TSA Manager at Austin) just came back and told me that TSA came out with a "Policy" a few months ago, denying HCPs as valid Primary ID, however if you have a Social Security card on your person in addition, it is acceptable in the aggregate. 

Just cleared security at Austin, using my HCP as ID.  Was not even questioned.  Had some time to kill, so I looked up the on duty manager of TSA, he checked on his "cheat sheet", and he said TN HCP were good to go, as they have the DL number on it, and he told me that he and his people know that.

If you check the Facebook page it would have been hard to miss the give away.  Even got a notice in the Tennessean, was posted on the Web site, and copied to every e-mail list we have through local Chapters.   Will be more coming up.   Through my deal with TGO David, I do not post such things on TGO.  But, if you want to keep up with TFA, it is not hard to do.

As I said in the original post, "Headed out to TX", I was at Nashville. I have "On Principal" used my HCP for years at Nashville, and did just two weeks ago and it was accepted, to check in and to pass so called security. I can use it to vote, from TN.GOV: why not to board a plane. My reading of: is that a HCP card is a photo ID issued by the Dept. of Safety in TN, which IS "equivalent". Plus, it has my Drivers License number on it, and has all of the information shown on the DL, with the addition of the copy of my signature, and, is backed up by an FBI, TBI and local LE background check, where the DL is not. And to boot, I think his information is BS, and can promise I will find out. If I am wrong, I will admit it, but the two electronic strips across the back are the exact same thing that is on the DL and there is a world of info on them that does not show on the front.

I slapped my DL and Passport in his hand, and yes, it is a matter of principal.  In TN is the permit not issued by the DOS which last thing I knew was our Department of Motor Vehicles?

Heading out to TX yesterday, going through security, handed the nice young man my HCP card (as I have done about a 1000 times) and he handed it back saying he could not accept it. Mumbled something about a "rules change".