Fallguy

I'll just say the same goes for Logan's Roadhouse in Jackson, but in my case it was the Ribeye that's superb.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,323727,00.html Founder of Anti-Gun Group Pleads No Contest to Weapons Charges Friday , January 18, 2008 LOS ANGELES — A former gang member who founded an anti-violence group called No Guns has pleaded no contest to federal weapons charges. Hector "Big Weasel" Marroquin, 51, and co-defendant Sylvia Arrellano, 25, entered pleas Thursday for three counts of manufacture, distribution and transport for sale of an unlawful assault weapon. Arrellano also pleaded no contest to machine gun conversion and possessing a silencer and acknowledged that the crime was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. She was given until Tuesday to surrender for sentencing and would likely be sentenced to four years in prison, prosecutors said. Marroquin attorney Patrick Smith did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment Thursday. No phone listing was available for Arrellano. Marroquin was arrested in June at his Downey home following a nine-month investigation into weapons sales by the 18th Street gang, to which he once belonged. Arrellano was arrested at a Cudahy home as a result of the same investigation Marroquin founded No Guns in 1996, ostensibly to reduce gang and gun violence. The group received $1.5 million from the city as a subcontractor on anti-gang efforts but its contract was canceled last year after authorities learned that Marroquin had hired relatives, including his son, Hector "Little Weasel" Marroquin. The son is an acknowledged 18th Street gang member who pleaded no contest in June 2007 to home-invasion robbery and was sentenced to nine years in state prison.

What did I ever do to you strickj? LOL

Unlikely....the best bet would be for those that live in his district to vote someone else in and/or vote in more republicans to the house.

You all are in bad shape for heros then....lol

It's true that getting it expunged and then keeping it from showing up on a check are two different things. According to the TICS website, nearly half of their denials are overturned on appeal. Also from their FAQ page. I previously tried to purchase a firearm and was denied. After I filed my appeal, the denial was overturned and I was allowed to get the firearm. Now I've tried to purchase another firearm and was denied again. What's going on? If your previous denial was overturned, it became an approved transaction. Under existing state and federal law, TICS cannot retain any information about an approved transaction and so will not have any record about the overturn. Documentation submitted by the arresting agency or the clerk of court may have been sufficient for TICS to overturn the denial but not sufficient for TBI's Records and Identification Unit and/or the FBI's Criminal History Records Information Data Correction Unit to make permanent changes to their records. Submission of the proper forms by the arresting agency or clerk of court will result in your record being amended by the TBI and the FBI. Such documentation may be the R-84 Final Disposition Report Form or an official Order for Expunction. The above link for TBI's Records and Identification Unit will give you the information you need to clear up any problems with your criminal history record.

The website I use to look up TN code is having problems as well so I can't look up or quote the exact statute, but a Class E felony is the lowest punishable by a term of 1 - 6 years in prison, best I remember. I didn't read word for word all in the links that canynracer posted, where was that about 7 years? AFAIK it is always on your record.

Well...I had a little bit longer of answer typed up, but due to some computer problems I lost it. Basically I was saying canynracer found good info. I work with a guy who was convicted over 35 years ago of a felony and still can't get a gun or a HCP. As it is says in the one link it is possible to get your rights restored, just very hard. Here is a link to the FBI's NICS system that list prohibited peoples, like the link above. Basically the problem in this case is Federal law, not TN law. ...and just where is The Rabbi? Haven't seen him post in a while.

LOL...there is more truth in that statement than jest...

From what is posted on this page. It has past on 1st consideration in the Senate. So it would still need to be pass a 2nd time, then possibablly refered to and voted on in any committees then past for a final 3rd time to be done in the Senate. In the House it is only been introduced and not even been brought up for the 1st consideration. If it passes that then it still has to go through the same process as above for the Senate. Although as someone stated in another thread, the committee process in the house is much more tough than the senate.

I did see that while looking for the other bill. Best I could tell it would let full-time faculty and staff at public schools, colleges, and universities in Tennessee carry handguns on school property if they have a HCP while still prohibiting students or the general public from being able to carry.

That's my take....Just like VT I guess. ....although I still would like something from the state, like AK does, just so I could still carry in other states.

At least every comment so far is pro-gun...

db99wj too bad you don't work in the media.... could use more people with a fair and impartial point of view. It does seem that most of the articles and news spots I've seen and heard let people think that this bill will allow people to drink while armed, without straight forward saying that. Also the general public just seems to flat our forget or ignore that the thugs don't obey the laws anyway. Ok...I'll stop before I rant too much...lol

I think "part" of the problem is that some laws were on the books before HCP's were issued and have never been amended to reflect the current situation. I do agree that any true and substantial changes will be very difficult as long as Naifeh is the speaker of the house, but don't let that stop you from communicating with your elected officals and letting them know how you feel. Thanks waynesan. GlockFD I agree that SB0023 passing is a good step, but the companion bill HB0702 will have a much harder time in the house, see above. But at least the legislature may be more receptive to change in the future. Thank you all for bearing with me on my little rant...lol

LOL...no it's the legislature's and AG's fault.

If you have ever looked up... T.C.A. 39-17-1306 Carrying weapons during judicial proceedings. or T.C.A. 39-17-1311 Carrying weapons on public parks, playgrounds, civic centers and other public recreational buildings and grounds. You see that instead of saying you can't carry a handgun or firearm they say you can't carry a list of prohibited weapons in T.C.A. 39-17-1302(a) of which a handgun or normal long gun is not one. Where as T.C.A. 39-17-1305 and T.C.A. 39-17-1309 both specifically say handguns and/or firearms instead of refering to 39-17-1302(a) But, according to TN AG opinion 07-148 questions 1 & 3 a person with a HCP may not go armed in the places listed in 39-17-1306 and 39-17-1311. But...if you look at TN AG opinon 01-020 Footnote 1 on page 2 it makes a distinction between weapons in 39-17-1302 and firearms including a handgun, shotgun and rifle in 39-17-1307. Of course the biggest difference between 07-148 and 01-020 is that they were issued by two different AG's. Just another reason I think the laws need a complete overhaul.

The six that voted no are... Sens Charlotte Burks, D-Monterey; Thelma Harper, D-Nashville; Joe Haynes, D-Goodlettsville; Andy Berke, D-Chattanooga; Rosalind Kurita, D-Clarksville and Beverly Marrero, D-Memphis

By handle in that particular situation I think it means not moving it around in your vehicle, loading-unloading it or the like. If you needed to use it in self defense you should be ok. Also even though I don't think it applies to the above situation (in that you are legal to start with) there is a safe harbor, as some have called it, statute. T.C.A. 39-17-1322 A person shall not be charged with or convicted of a violation under this part if the person possessed, displayed or employed a handgun in justifiable self-defense or in justifiable defense of another during the commission of a crime in which that person or the other person defended was a victim.

Most on this forum are aware of T.C.A. 39-17-1359 which allows any property owner, private or goverment, to post signs to prevent weapons from being carried on their property. I thought from your previous post that you said there was a law that prevented weapons from being carried on the capital grounds without a sign having to be posted. Just like (for now) a bar does not have to post a sign beacause it is illegal to carry by statute.

Which is where the real challenge is going to be!!! Call your Rep.s Vote YES on HB0702!!! Although there is no date set yet, first action for the house bill is in the Criminal Practice Sub-Committee.. http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/house/Committees/hsubmemb.htm#crim

If you'll pay for my laywer too, I'll go with ya....

The only thing I see is a pro-restaurant carry letter to the editor. http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080116/OPINION02/80115071/1007/OPINION

Just to stir the pot a little bit... 39-17-1311©(3) allows the The legislative body of any municipality or committee appointed by the body to regulate public recreational property may exempt public recreational property located within its jurisdiction from the requirements of subdivision ©(1). ©(1) is the part about having to post signs. I do agree with Razorback though in that in my opinion 39-17-1311 does not apply to handguns, but rather a list of prohibited weapons in 39-17-1302(a). But there are a few AG opinions that disagree with us. But I do also feel that a city can block off a street, parking lot or any other city property and deem it "recreational property" for a time frame of it's choosing. Also...if you feel you can carry concealed legally you should be able to carry open and defend your posistion to carry period. Unless you are carrying concealed in an attempt to "get away" with something that you aren't sure is legal.

I'm not saying there isn't, but if there is...it's not in Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13 where other places that are off limits are. But....last time I was at the captial seems there was some type of no gun sign...and 39-17-1359 does allow goverments to keep old signs if they were posted prior to July 1, 2001 and in substantial compliance.