TN House Bill 0363

[300winmag]

This is a great bill that is basically legalizes carry with a handgun carry permit in any location that does not have armed guards at the entrances.  We need the NRA, TFA, and other gun orgs to get behind this bill.  It would greatly increase the locations where we would be legal carrying a handgun.  The bill does not have a senate sponsor but hopefully with enough support there can be a senate sponsor and work to move this through the committees and to floor votes.

The bill expands on the safe commute law accomplished a couple of years ago which basically now keeps you from having a weapons charge for having a gun in your car in any location if you have a carry permit.  IF this bill became law as written you would not have to worry about criminal prosecution in any location, unless that location has armed guards at the entrances.  You can still be asked to leave a location, and trespass laws still apply, but you do not have to worry about felony (school carry) or misdemeanor (other locations) weapons charges.

 

Edited February 1, 2017 by 300winmag

[xsubsailor]

 Sounds like the person who drafted this bill has friends or family in the metal detector or armed security guard businesses. 

 On a serious note, I don't really think this will fly.

 

 

[300winmag]

Why would this not be a good bill?  Basically you are legal at any local or state government building or property, including public colleges, as long as it is not a secure facility, like the statehouse.   It is our way to get public college carry in this state.

It's a whole lot better than what we have now and I'd gladly take it.  It's much better for the Univ of TN police to ask you to take your gun back to the car if they catch you carrying VS the present situation of putting you in handcuffs and getting a felony charge for intent to go armed on school property.

Edited February 1, 2017 by 300winmag

[Capbyrd]

Armed guard takes a piss break so you didn't see him.  You carry inside and boom, instant gun charge.  

[300winmag]

The way I understand it a weapons charge would only apply somewhere like the statehouse or some of the Memphis city government buildings that run metal detectors at the entrances and you walk past those metal detectors.  Right now you are subject to weapons charges in any posted location OR public school property.

There aren't secure entrances to every building at Univ of Tennessee or Univ of Memphis, so if this bill became law you would be legal carrying in the unsecure buildings.  Most public owned facilities are not going to go to the expense of putting armed guards and metal detectors at the entrance of every building that they own.  I still think it is a lot better than what we have now where we are illegal on all college property and risk a felony charge for carrying outside our car.  A more obvious college carry bill probably will not get through the legislature.

Edited February 1, 2017 by 300winmag

[macville]

This is a very good bill as it fixes many of the issues we have right now with the law. But the bill needs to be passed as written.

[300winmag]

Absolutely this is a great bill.  No it is not perfect because our permits should be enough proof that we are good folks and can carry in secure areas.  But in the real world that will never happen.  If this is the path to legalize carry in pretty much 90% of public owned buildings, including colleges, then this will work very well to accomplish that.  It still gives the government agency the ability to ask people to leave if someone is found to be carrying.  Again not perfect but I honestly think if you don't give the agency that ability to trespass people, NOTHING will get through the committee system.  Basically if you conceal, keep your mouth shut, then you will be legal as long as you don't walk into a secure area like the statehouse.  I like that and am glad someone in Nashville thinks the same way and wrote a bill. 

I hope this bill flies under the radar kind of like how the car carry bill passed without much media attention.

[macville]

Watch the city of knoxville put metal detectors at the TN valley fair to avoid this law if passed.

[JAB]

This law is not something that Tennessee has just cooked up.  At least one of the states that borders Tennessee, Georgia, has a clause in their law in which, in some places, the lack of a guard at an otherwise restricted building makes that building unrestricted.  I haven't heard of it being a big deal in Georgia.  Here is a pretty big quote from georgiapacking.org - the bolding and font color change of the text of the 'Exception' section is mine to emphasize the relative portion:

 

Quote

Carrying a Weapon in an Unauthorized Location: Carrying a weapon or long gun in any of the following places is against the law (misdemeanor offense, exceptions are below the list)...

1. In a government building. (if the building is open for business and where ingress into such building is restricted or screened by security personnel, read "-- Exception" below for details)
   -- "Government Building" means:
   1. The building in which a government entity is housed (Please see the definition for "government entity" below for more information)
   2. The building where a government entity meets in its official capacity; provided, however, that if such building is not a publicly owned building, such building shall be considered a government building for the purposes of this Code section only during the time such government entity is meeting at such building; or
   3. The portion of any building that is not a publicly owned building that is occupied by a government entity. (if a government entity rented out space in a mall and actually occupies it with people, only the "store" space they rented would be off limits)

   --"Government Entity" means an office, agency, authority, department, commission, board, body, division, instrumentality, or institution of the state or any county, municipal corporation, consolidated government, or local board of education within this state (This part of the law is kind of vague depending on who exactly is included regarding an "office" or "department" as to where they are "housed" or "occupied". The meaning most favorable to a person charged with violating this law (which is the way a court should rule) is limited to the location that contains the person that is in charge of the entire entity. Example: Your local tax office has 3 locations (all publicly owned) where you can make payments, the county tax commissioner is housed in building A and is off-limits, buildings b and c are not off limits because they do not house the Office of the tax commissioner. The meaning least favorable to a person charged with violating this law (which is a way police and prosecutors could interpret it and a court might rule) includes any location where an employee operates out of. Example: Your local tax office has 3 locations (all publicly owned) where you can make payments, all 3 locations are off limits. This does not include a blanket ban on all publicly owned buildings since the law says that a publicly owned building is only off-limits if an entity is housed or meets in the building).

    

   -- Exception: In addition to a building that meets one of the 3 above criteria for being a "government building", that building must also have security personnel which screens or restricts ingress into the building. If there is no one screening or restricting those entering into the building, it is not off limits. If you do not know if there is screening or resticting at the entrance, upon being notified that there is ongoing screening or restriction, you are not guilty of any crime if you immediatly exit. If a member of the security team is a peace officer and you fail to immediatly leave the building or exit the screening area, this is a misdemeanor offense. There is no definition of screen or restrict, so it is not known exactly what is required.

2. In a courthouse (a building occupied by judicial courts and containing rooms in which judicial proceedings are held)
3. In a jail or prison
4. In a place of worship, unless the governing body or authority of the place of worship permits the carrying of weapons or long guns by license holders. A license holder caught violating this provistion is not subject to arrest and but shall be fined not more than $100.
5. In a state mental health facility as defined in Code Section 37-1-1 which admits individuals on an involuntary basis for treatment of mental illness, developmental disability, or addictive disease
6. On the premises of a nuclear power facility (punishment for carry is a misdemeanor, carry with intent to do bodily harm is a felony)
7. Within 150 feet of a polling location when elections are being conducted and it is being used as a polling location

Edited February 2, 2017 by JAB

[300winmag]

We would be crazy not to get behind a solid bill like this that will open up quite a few places for legal carry.  Yeah it's not constitutional carry and it's not open carry, but a lot of people would be able to benefit from this bill if it became law, especially people who frequent public college campuses. 

[Oh Shoot]

20 minutes ago, 300winmag said:

We would be crazy not to get behind a solid bill like this that will open up quite a few places for legal carry.  Yeah it's not constitutional carry and it's not open carry, but a lot of people would be able to benefit from this bill if it became law, especially people who frequent public college campuses. 

Anything changed in legislature that would make passage of this possible?

WorriedMan, check in?

- OS

[btq96r]

The business/Chamber of Commerce types will oppose this. Maybe not publicly, but they'll get the message to those politicians they pay good money to leverage as needed.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk just to give Oh Shoot something to be grumpy about.

[300winmag]

I don't see why the business organizations would oppose this bill because it just affects local and state government owned property and from what I've read you MUST conceal your handgun to fall under this safe harbor.  It just removes a the ability to charge handgun carry permit people with weapons charges.

[btq96r]

I don't see why the business organizations would oppose this bill because it just affects local and state government owned property and from what I've read you MUST conceal your handgun to fall under this safe harbor.  It just removes a the ability to charge handgun carry permit people with weapons charges.

Businesses know the criminal statures are a big force in preventing guns from being brought through the door. They won't want that gone. They see a vigilante type event as a bigger threat than a robbery (which they're presumably insured against).

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk just to give Oh Shoot something to be grumpy about.

[300winmag]

The way I read this bill it does not have anything to do with private property and the ability of them to stick up the 500 dollar fine signs.   We still need a good bill to fix that problem but this bill does not change that.

I would however be glad if this bill became law because a lot of the local and state govt property in Memphis and Nashville are posted with no gun signs that can get you a misdemeanor.  Also it is illegal, potential felony, to carry at all public schools and colleges.

Edited February 3, 2017 by 300winmag

[btq96r]

On 2/3/2017 at 3:20 PM, 300winmag said:

The way I read this bill it does not have anything to do with private property and the ability of them to stick up the 500 dollar fine signs.   We still need a good bill to fix that problem but this bill does not change that.

I read the actual text of the bill, and I concur with you now.  For some reason, this thread had me thinking it was any location that didn't have armed guards or metal detectors that would fall under its scope. 

I'm in favor of government buildings not being allowed to prohibit handguns at all to someone with an HCP.  They're public places, and if someone is deemed safe by the process in place to carry a handgun, then the government shouldn't get to limit their ability to carry in buildings open to the public.

I'm still fine with criminal charges for those carrying past a sign in private business locations.  I think that is an entirely different question that isn't related to this one (now that I know the full situation of it).

[300winmag]

Yeah at first I thought the bill applied to all property but after reading it through a couple times it applies to publicly owned local and state government property, which still is a big help for legal carry.  If this bill became law, you'd be legal at public colleges, the airport (of course not beyond the TSA checkpoints), local/state govt offices.  You just have to keep your handgun concealed and not walk past entrances that have screening and armed guards.

[JAB]

On 2/3/2017 at 4:20 PM, 300winmag said:

The way I read this bill it does not have anything to do with private property and the ability of them to stick up the 500 dollar fine signs.   We still need a good bill to fix that problem but this bill does not change that.

I would however be glad if this bill became law because a lot of the local and state govt property in Memphis and Nashville are posted with no gun signs that can get you a misdemeanor.  Also it is illegal, potential felony, to carry at all public schools and colleges.

It has never made any sense to me that the very government that deems a person to be eligible for a permit, sets the requirements for that person to get a permit, vets the person as safe and trustworthy to carry a gun before issuing the permit, takes the person's money in fees, etc. for the permit and then issues the permit turns around and basically says that the same person isn't safe and trustworthy enough to carry a gun in 'their' (our) buildings and that the permit issued by that very government basically isn't valid in their (our) buildings.  It just shows how elitist most politicians are - like they are saying, "Well, we are fine with you carrying in restaurants and places like that around the general public but we don't want you carrying around important people like us."

Edited February 6, 2017 by JAB

[300winmag]

It is insane that the very issuing department, TN DOS, of these permits bans legal carry in a lot of their buildings.  State of TN wants your money for a permit but doesn't want you to carry.  That was the impression I had especially ten or so years ago when you had to have a permit to keep a handgun in your car but couldn't carry in any decent restaurant, park, and of course the govt owned buildings.  Even now, you see the fit some of the politicians throw when some politicians try to let handgun carry folks carry legally in the statehouse.  Didn't one bring a rifle to the statehouse last year?  He was safe enough to bring his rifle for display on 'weak gun laws' but someone with a permit is unsafe to carry there.   

I do think if this bill gains any traction, the bedwetter politicians made up of lite Democrat RINO's and democrats, will do everything possible to keep this from reaching floor vote.  They'll attach a fiscal note claiming the bill will increase costs because all these local and state offices will have to post armed guards and metal detectors to stop legal folks with permits from carrying.  At the same time they'll fail to recognize how stupid they are that anyone who has wanted to carry in 'their' buildings has been carrying for a long time and sometimes without a permit.

Edited February 6, 2017 by 300winmag

[JAB]

22 hours ago, 300winmag said:

It is insane that the very issuing department, TN DOS, of these permits bans legal carry in a lot of their buildings.

Yeah, I usually renew my permit in person and it always annoys me that I am not legally allowed to carry my firearm in the very facility where I go to renew the permit.

 

[300winmag]

This bill now has a companion bill in the Senate.  It is SB 0653.

[Worriedman]

On 2/2/2017 at 5:49 PM, Oh Shoot said:

Anything changed in legislature that would make passage of this possible?

WorriedMan, check in?

- OS

Not one thing.  Nicely is a great person, and I like him personally, Ramsey will not pull for this to pass, and if anyone does not think he is still pulling strings, they have soft spots in their head.  With Lundberg on Judiciary, does anyone expect any firearms bills to get a fair shake?

Beth is the one who killed it last year, she is still in power...

Edited February 9, 2017 by Worriedman

[300winmag]

Do you think this other HB 0508 has a chance?  I know it just nullifies 'no gun' signs on local and state property but doesn't affect anything else.

 

It looks like that one is about the only gun bill with quite a few sponsors.

[Worriedman]

Looks like a lot of cosponsors, not sure what it does quite yet, my guess someone has a cousin that sells metal detectors to municipalities...

 

[JAB]

I am sure that someone will gut HB0508.  They will probably do away with the requirement that each person who enters through the public entrance must be searched in order for firearms to be legally prohibited.  Then, knowing how much our legislature loves their damned signs, someone will probably amend it so that there has to be an officer or security guard 'on duty' but if the officer or security guard is away from the door a sign alerting people entering the building that there is a guard 'on duty' will stand in substitution of the actual guard as long as there is at least one guard 'on duty' during open hours.  Then local governments will assign a bailiff or even a patrol officer to be the official 'guard', that person will actually be present 'guarding' the door for maybe an hour or two each day and we, the citizens of the state of Tennessee who go through qualification, vetting, paying fees and other nonsense in order to get the state to say that we are safe and honest enough to carry a firearm will get screwed over, once more.

 

I am so sick of our 'pro-gun' Republican majority legislature that I could vomit.  I am thinking maybe we should elect a few more Democrats or maybe elect a Democrat governor next time because the Republicans seem to get more done for gun rights when they are trying to bullsh...er...convince us that they are on our side.  When they actually gain control of the legislature they get complacent and show their true colors.

Edited February 10, 2017 by JAB