monkeylizard

  And based on the other new gun law that snuck in this year, that would create grounds for challenging the termination as wrongful. You'd still have to bring the lawsuit and pay a lawyer, but you'd now have a law on your side.

This. If they do have to sell and you guys can meet on price, then they can do the deal directly with you and save everyone the expenses of an auction house.

Is a playground = athletic field? I wouldn't think so, but even if it is it would only make the playground and its immediate vicinity off limits while the school is using it. The rest of the park would be OK.

The only problem I have with that one is that it's cheaper at KY Gun Co. :) I've seen it as low as $509 cash price at KY Gun Co. but that's rock bottom that I've ever seen anywhere. Just make sure you're getting model# 811036. There are some variants on the Sport for commie state compliance like bullet buttons and 10-rd mags. Your link and mine both go to 811036 models.   http://www.kygunco.com/smith-and-wesson-mp15-sport-556mm-nato-30-round-37242   It's a great starter rifle. Smith used to put 5R barrels in them, but I'm pretty sure they stopped that.

  I don't see why. 1359 (f ) says "other similar public place" after it specifcially names public park, natural area, historic park, nature trail, campground, forest, greenway, waterway. A museum or community center is not similar to a park, greenway, natural area, etc, in my opinion. A judge may or may not agree. Who knows? This is all speculative on my part based on my own plain reading of 1359 (f ).         As OS said, the federal statutues show that such a dichotomy can exist so the building existing entirely in a park is probably irrelevant. I think you're on to something though about the facilities in question not being posted under 1359. Most that I've seen in Nashville are posted under 1311. If the city doesn't wise up, we'll be good to go, but I still think 1359 would apply to those facilities if they slap on some gunbusters or update the language on their signs to be in line with 1359. It will take someone being charged and subsequent case law to know for sure though, or another change to the laws, namely 1359 (f ) to include all property types listed in 1311.

  The ones I've seen in Nashville are posted under 1311 and specifically cite 1311, not 1359.

  Go back and look at 1359 again.       Neither the Sportsplex nor the Community Centers fit that description. That makes them as gray as Bridgestone IMO. You probably have a good argument for Wave Country and I think you're 100% right about the Two Rivers Skate Park since "Park" is in its official name. I think 1359 may still apply to those non "park" properties and buildings operated by parks departments and other administrative arms. 1311 clearly spells out that it applies to such places, but 1359 doesn't expressly defer to 1311 on those kinds of places. With the new change to 1311, you'd no longer be in violation of 1311 by carrying, but you may still be in violation of 1359.

[x-post]   Actually, it's publicly owned. The city owns it. It's privately managed. It's clearly a civic center IMO, which puts it in a sort-of gray area right now.   One of the laws which was changed specifically references such buildings, which would make you think they'd be good-to-go for carry now. But another law about posting non-parks/schools may still apply.   To make it sticky, the Bridgestone is not actually posted in any way that I can find on any doors, but as LagerHead said, they wand everyone. It's their policy to not allow firearms, but have done nothing to legally prohibit them. So the real world application is that it's not legally prohibited at Bridgestone, but you'd be arguing the finer points of law with a minimum wage "security" person.

  It was a tongue-in-cheek comment, thus the " :D " smilie

Buy up some of the "guns allowed" stickers and start putting them on the park signs. :D

I've seen 4 in the past week around west Nashville. All dead.

You mean the signs, right?

I give it until Tuesday.

Agreed. 1359 needs to be repealed in it's entirety. It won't happen while Haslam is governor. He'd veto that in a heartbeat.

1) That's Yoda acting annoying, not being an actual screw-up who ruins everything like Jar-Jar is. 2) It's short lived. Once he makes his assessment of Luke, no need to be that way any longer. Jar-Jar is the way he is all the time. Jar-Jar would have been funny if he was in the movies for as long as irritating Yoda is.

  The problem with that is that you have to know when each law or revision was enacted. If law A and law B conflict and they both say that, which one is overriding the other?

  Would those non-park properties (zoos, arenas, etc.) still fall under 1359? 1311 clearly mentions them, but the part of 1359 which defers parks to 1311 doesn't mention them.  

Yeah. My OC comment was tongue-in-cheek.

  Will they pass a law to fix grammar as well? :whistle:

I'm thinking a frame mounted holster for my bike. :D

  Done, but I'm still never voting for him for anything.

  That would require reasoned thought and introspection. That's why it doesn't happen.

So.....who's going out OC'ing this afternoon in a formerly posted park?   :hiding: