Restaurant Carry

[Fallguy]

Does anybody have any proposed legislation numbers so we can get on this "specifically" in letters, emails and phone calls to our officials?

We had a shooting last week here in the bowling alley in Jackson. I want to be able to "legally" carry ALL THE TIME. This issue is getting more and more important to me by the day...

mrmoetn

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16726

[mrmoetn]

Thanks Fallguy!

[DaveTN]

Screw that! F compromising and F the Dems. I want restaurant carry period. Not ANOTHER restriction. Do I drink when I carry? NO. I don't need some jackass Democrat peon telling me another thing I can't do.

Give us what we want and go back to your hookers and blow. I'm done compromising with people WE PUT IN OFFICE! This is my damn country, my freedom, and my right to live and defend myself. It's illegal to be under the influence ".08" and carry. There is already a law. Leave it be.

I have pulled too many bodies from vehicles caused by those that thought they could handle their liquor.

Even though .08% has nothing to do with the handgun law, it is not a “legal limit”; it is a presumption that you are legally intoxicated.

If I’m in an armed encounter with a thug in convenience store the last thing in the world I need is some drunken azz stumbling into the middle of it and thinking their mind can process what they are seeing and that they can function.

I will not support any legislation that allows a HCP holder to drink while they are carrying. And in my opinion all it will do is ensure certain death of any legislation that would allow those of us that want to responsibly carry; be allowed to do so.

Edited February 1, 2009 by DaveTN

[Guest nraforlife]

And lose your job because of the criminal conviction and have to sell all the rest of your firearms because all you can get is chief fry cook at mikky d's.

Civil disobedience is painting a sign and walking back and forth in front of capitol hill or chaining yourself to an antigun sign with an unloaded handgun to make a point, not breaking the law and trying to get away with it.

Ahhh, so if/when gun confiscation, or restrictions or whatever they call it, is passed your going to

1) turn all of your banned items in and keep your job cause the law is the law

2) turn all of your banned items in but paint a sign and walk back and forth in front of capitol hill or chain yourself to an antigun sign with an unloaded handgun and keep your job maybe if you don't piss off your boss

3) say frick them, break the law, defend your rights and find another job.

[Guest nraforlife]

I have pulled too many bodies from vehicles caused by those that thought they could handle their liquor.

Even though .08% has nothing to do with the handgun law, it is not a “legal limitâ€; it is a presumption that you are legally intoxicated.

If I’m in an armed encounter with a thug in convenience store the last thing in the world I need is some drunken azz stumbling into the middle of it and thinking their mind can process what they are seeing and that they can function.

I will not support any legislation that allows a HCP holder to drink while they are carrying. And in my opinion all it will do is ensure certain death of any legislation that would allow those of us that want to responsibly carry; be allowed to do so.

+1. If you drink and are packing they ought to build the jail in top of your sorry ass.

Law should basically state that carry is permitted anywhere that has not been posted per... but consumption of any alcohol beverage, including beer, wine and liquor while carrying a firearm is prohibited. And let the punishment be high enough to sober anyone up.

[Guest Mugster]

Ahhh, so if/when gun confiscation, or restrictions or whatever they call it, is passed your going to

1) turn all of your banned items in and keep your job cause the law is the law

2) turn all of your banned items in but paint a sign and walk back and forth in front of capitol hill or chain yourself to an antigun sign with an unloaded handgun and keep your job maybe if you don't piss off your boss

3) say frick them, break the law, defend your rights and find another job.

Wasn't the subject about illegally carrying a handgun into a restaurant that serves drinks? How does a general gun confiscation fit into that logic?

The answer is it doesn't. First, I hope you don't represent the NRA. Second, I hope a some guy that reads this thread doesn't say, you know, its a good idea to go ahead and carry without a permit or pack into a bar. All these guys on here say its ok.

Its a good idea to fit into society and obey the laws, right up until the point that it isn't. If a big gun grab happens, I dunno what I'll do. And thats probably not too important. Ultimately my world is over half over, in 25 years, I'll be retired. Its up to the young people to decide how they want to live.

Edited February 2, 2009 by Mugster

[Guest nraforlife]

Didn't mean to hijack this thread and turn it into a exercise on debating what civil disobedience means.

Carrying anywhere posted or restricted by law isn't a smart thing to do especially places the serve alcohol for on-site consumption as we all know that Tennesseans are wild animals around that evil drink. Question, since the Catholic Church serves wine with communion is that technically a non-carry location? Hopefully the State will show some common sense and rewrite some of the more assinine laws. If they don't then they don't and we have to live with it until the next session and try again.

Edited February 2, 2009 by nraforlife

[Guest JeepMonkey]

I have pulled too many bodies from vehicles caused by those that thought they could handle their liquor.

Even though .08% has nothing to do with the handgun law, it is not a “legal limit”; it is a presumption that you are legally intoxicated.

If I’m in an armed encounter with a thug in convenience store the last thing in the world I need is some drunken azz stumbling into the middle of it and thinking their mind can process what they are seeing and that they can function.

I will not support any legislation that allows a HCP holder to drink while they are carrying. And in my opinion all it will do is ensure certain death of any legislation that would allow those of us that want to responsibly carry; be allowed to do so.

X2.

When NC passed their CCP legislation, two compromises had to be made. The first was the no campus carry to satisfy the Democrat-controlled legislature, and the second was to not allow anyone to take a drink while carrying to satisfy the general public (the Dems also got ahold of this one and wrote it down the same way it is here now).

I was a paramedic before I went to college. I too have seen what happens when people were "buzzed" and felt they could still drive or ride a motorcycle even though they had fresh alcohol in their system. I've pulled both victims and corpses from cars, trees, lakes, and houses; all of whom thought that being under the legal limit meant they could drive, be adventurous, swim, or cook without a problem. 0.08% BAC means nothing; impaired judgment is impaired judgment.

[Guest Traumaslave]

I have pulled too many bodies from vehicles caused by those that thought they could handle their liquor.

Even though .08% has nothing to do with the handgun law, it is not a “legal limitâ€; it is a presumption that you are legally intoxicated.

If I’m in an armed encounter with a thug in convenience store the last thing in the world I need is some drunken azz stumbling into the middle of it and thinking their mind can process what they are seeing and that they can function.

I will not support any legislation that allows a HCP holder to drink while they are carrying. And in my opinion all it will do is ensure certain death of any legislation that would allow those of us that want to responsibly carry; be allowed to do so.

I'll drink to that!! No need to mix ETOH and gun powder. It doesn't work.

[Guest offroader1994]

I also support the part about being able to carry in most establishments that i want to. i also agree with the "do not drink anything while you are carrying any type of weapon". I do not think anyone should carry in a bar or in a night club. If i am out to eat with my family i would much rather be able to carry and be able to protect my family then have the dumba$$ that does non have a permit and does not care about anything but getting the money so he or she can run to the ghetto corner and get that meth, pot, crack or cocaine to get that high that he or she has to have. The part about the 60% is a bunch of horse crap. I would be almost willing to bet my favorite firearm to say that almost all reasturants on days such as New years eve, really pushes that number. Lets say i go in to the local tuby ruesdays on thursday and eat legally, then i go on saturday and they have a we ordered to much booze and we are selling it for half price. then i am breaking the law and may loose my permit when all the good quality deputy dog or barney phife guys stand and watch who is walking out of the business that night. If i am in a gas station and someone is in there holding the place up and i can safley and acuratley end the situation then i hope i can do the right thing and protect those in danger, i have never been in that situation and hope that i never am. alright i have said my 2cents worth.

[Glock30Owner]

I really hate the idea of any percentage being used. I should be allowed to carry anywhere not posted. I also don't think there needs to be a "no drinking provision" since we already have a separate law that prohibits being intoxicated while carrying.

Since I've never worked a breathalyzer or any other device for detecting BAC, what is the lowest detectable amount for these devices? Is it .01 or even .005 or lower? A better idea, IMO, would be to ammend the current "no drinking" law to remove officer perception and make it illegal to carry if a person's BAC is at the lowest detectable level on the devices that LEOs use most often.

[Fallguy]

I really hate the idea of any percentage being used. I should be allowed to carry anywhere not posted. I also don't think there needs to be a "no drinking provision" since we already have a separate law that prohibits being intoxicated while carrying.

Since I've never worked a breathalyzer or any other device for detecting BAC, what is the lowest detectable amount for these devices? Is it .01 or even .005 or lower? A better idea, IMO, would be to ammend the current "no drinking" law to remove officer perception and make it illegal to carry if a person's BAC is at the lowest detectable level on the devices that LEOs use most often.

I agree. What I would like to see is 39-17-1321 changed to include a BAC even if it was substaintly lower that DUI, even if it you were scared that one drink would put you over the limit. That way at least there would be hard and fast limit instead of up to someone else's discretion.

Lets say i go in to the local tuby ruesdays on thursday and eat legally, then i go on saturday and they have a we ordered to much booze and we are selling it for half price. then i am breaking the law and may loose my permit when all the good quality deputy dog or barney phife guys stand and watch who is walking out of the business that night.

That's not the way it works, it would be determined on a yearly basis, not day to day.

Edited February 3, 2009 by Fallguy

[Guest HexHead]

Some of those states don't even prohibit drinking while carrying either! I don't believe Mass. does or California. TN doesn't by law prohibit drinking while carrying, just being 'under the influence'....I don't see a need in another law on top of a present law.

It's easy to have very liberal carry privileges when you don't actually issue any permits.

While I hate the term "common sense gun laws", carrying in an establishment that serves alcohol as long as you're not drinking, is well just common sense. I'd support that, but I don't like the 60% number when most other states that use a percentage keep it at 51%. I can't get behind any regulation that includes the word "revocation" when the written law can be subject to interpretation. I still read that proposed Senate bill as they could revoke your permit for being in a posted location.

Edited February 2, 2009 by HexHead

[DaveTN]

What are we (as a group) trying to do here guys? Are we trying to have it so we can go into establishments that serve liquor by the drink, or are we trying to get it so we can go in and also drink? Because one I can support; one I can’t.

I also see no need to bog this down with BAC levels. There is already a law in effect for being drunk while carrying. This would be a different law. If a cop sees you drinking he arrests you, if a bartender or patron calls the police because you are carrying and wants to make a complaint; the Officer will determine if it is credible or not. If he thinks it is you are arrested and get your day in court; if it’s not he leaves.

I agree. What I would like to see is 39-17-1321 changed to include a BAC even if it was substaintly lower that DUI, even if it you were scared that one drink would put you over the limit. That way at least there would be hard and fast limit instead of up to someone else's discretion.

Most people have no idea what .08 BAC is unless they have been tested after drinking. Because of that coupled with the fact that their judgment is impaired; they blow. If you want to add in a BAC level that is fine; it will be below .08 and it will have “implied consent” attached to it. Only I’m going to take a WAG and say that implied consent on the gun charge will be a revocation of your HCP; not a suspension like it is with your DL.

I would guess that most drunks that are carrying are discovered during a traffic stop. If you have two different BAC levels, you could possibly have a dilemma.

Edited February 3, 2009 by Fallguy

[dralarms]

I might be about to piss some one off here but here goes....

I agree that we need a "clean bill" let us carry anywhere and everywhere we want. Make it a FELONY to drink while carrying (I wouldn't care any more or less), and lower the BAC for drunk driving to .04 , I used to drink and I NEVER even got behind the wheel of a car with even 1 sip in me. (Watched my dad wreck too many cars drunk).

[Punisher84]

I have pulled too many bodies from vehicles caused by those that thought they could handle their liquor.

Even though .08% has nothing to do with the handgun law, it is not a “legal limitâ€; it is a presumption that you are legally intoxicated.

If I’m in an armed encounter with a thug in convenience store the last thing in the world I need is some drunken azz stumbling into the middle of it and thinking their mind can process what they are seeing and that they can function.

I will not support any legislation that allows a HCP holder to drink while they are carrying. And in my opinion all it will do is ensure certain death of any legislation that would allow those of us that want to responsibly carry; be allowed to do so.

OK I see your point and agree with it, but MY point is I don't want to have to compromise. It's common sense for God's sake, you don't drink and tote your gun.

All I'm saying is I think it's fair to say OK if you are intoxicated and carrying a firearm your permit is getting pulled. Isn't that how it is already anyway? I just don't think we need an extra law in a restaurant carry bill. I'm not gonna drink and carry, but at the same time I do know my limits and if I should choose to have A as in one beer while I'm in a restaurant, I really don't think it's so big of an issue that I need to have my license pulled.

Again, let me state this so I don't get a psycho flameout from anyone I personally do NOT drink even around firearms.

[Guest Legally Armed]

There are a few items that everyone should understand. Nafie has the new Speaker of the House in his pocket. No matter what anyone says, this was old time politics at its best, that put the new Speaker in charge. Nafie is a friend of the Restaurant Association. Nafie does not want to see the restaurant bill passed. Although we all want no percentages in the law, it will be hard to stop that provision. Kentucky has a 51% provision that allows carry in any establishment that receives less that 51% of their revenue from the sale of alcohol. Above that amont means it is a bar. The establishment must post the percentage on the outside so Legally Armed Individuals know the type of percentages. Most other states have similar percentages. States steal law provisions from each other. The only two exceptions are Virginia that does not allow for 'concealed' carry in locations that sell alcohol for consumption on the premises. Howver, Virgnina does allow 'open' carry in those locations. And New York City where getting a license to carry is expensive and also political. There are NO restrictions with their license. Pass the background check, commit to a gun safety class, and where you go and how you act is YOUR responsibility. It is about time to shoot for what makes sense. No restrictions PERIOD! Why be disarmed in any location if you have shown based in the criminal background investigation, you are a law abiding citizen. The thugs don't care about laws. If they want to commit a crime, it is easier with an equalizer. If they do it, we should be able to defend ourselves LEGALLY! This is not a new idea. Here is a link to a 2001 article on this subject.

http://legallyarmed.com/resources/sanctuary.htm

[Fallguy]

OK I see your point and agree with it, but MY point is I don't want to have to compromise. It's common sense for God's sake, you don't drink and tote your gun.

*All I'm saying is I think it's fair to say OK if you are intoxicated and carrying a firearm your permit is getting pulled. Isn't that how it is already anyway? I just don't think we need an extra law in a restaurant carry bill. I'm not gonna drink and carry, but at the same time I do know my limits and **if I should choose to have A as in one beer while I'm in a restaurant, I really don't think it's so big of an issue that I need to have my license pulled.

Again, let me state this so I don't get a psycho flameout from anyone I personally do NOT drink even around firearms.

*If you are convicted, Yes. 39-17-1352(f)(1) says if you are convicted of a Class A Misdemanor you are supposed to surrender your permit. Violation of 39-17-1321 is a Class A Misdemanor.

** +1

[Punisher84]

*If you are convicted, Yes. 39-17-1352(f)(1) says if you are convicted of a Class A Misdemanor you are supposed to surrender your permit. Violation of 39-17-1321 is a Class A Misdemanor.

** +1

Thanks man. That's what I thought.

[Falcon1]

I want to be able to go to an Applebee's, Longhorn Steakhouse, etc. while carrying concealed and eat a meal and drink a soft drink...that's all.

[Guest 270win]

The key i think IF a % is put in placed...it is based on alcohol sales...NOT food sales. That way we can legally carry at bowling alleys, movie theaters, golf ranges, and the like who do not primarily make their business income from food...but are still not bars/night clubs.

I would prefer to see no alcohol or food % requirement, but a lot of states, especially Southern states, have a big fear of alcohol...similar to the wet/dry counties that exist.

[Guest db99wj]

The key i think IF a % is put in placed...it is based on alcohol sales...NOT food sales. That way we can legally carry at bowling alleys, movie theaters, golf ranges, and the like who do not primarily make their business income from food...but are still not bars/night clubs.

I would prefer to see no alcohol or food % requirement, but a lot of states, especially Southern states, have a big fear of alcohol...similar to the wet/dry counties that exist.

Would a bowling alley, theater, golf course still be off limits? They don't derive most of the income from alcohol sales, it is the snack bar at the movies (most profitable part of a theater), bowling, golf etc.

Other states that have a % in them, do they distinguish between food/alcohol or a certain % no matter what else they do? Or are the laws specifically for restaurants, and food % vs alcohol %. or are they part of the law but listed as a different section?

Does this make sense? Having trouble explaining myself on this!

[Fallguy]

Would a bowling alley, theater, golf course still be off limits? They don't derive most of the income from alcohol sales, it is the snack bar at the movies (most profitable part of a theater), bowling, golf etc.

Other states that have a % in them, do they distinguish between food/alcohol or a certain % no matter what else they do? Or are the laws specifically for restaurants, and food % vs alcohol %. or are they part of the law but listed as a different section?

Does this make sense? Having trouble explaining myself on this!

I think I get what you are saying.

The trouble is, the bills that are currently introduced say a place must make 60% revenue from food sales.

While a bowling alley would make 40% or less of sales in alcohol, the other 60% is mostly made from other things besides food.

Not so sure if I was clear now....lol

[Guest db99wj]

I think I get what you are saying.

The trouble is, the bills that are currently introduced say a place must make 60% revenue from food sales.

While a bowling alley would make 40% or less of sales in alcohol, the other 60% is mostly made from other things besides food.

Not so sure if I was clear now....lol

I think you get what I am thinking. If the law says, 40% or less can be alcohol sales would be one thing, but if it says 40%/60%, it would seem to be more prohibitive. It would basically say, any non food place, or place with a snack bar, but a place that is something other than a restaurant would still be off limits because of the alcohol/food ratio... but if it is just the 40% sales or less can be alcohol, then those places would be ok....

I'm going back to work....

[Fallguy]

I think you get what I am thinking. If the law says, 40% or less can be alcohol sales would be one thing, but if it says 40%/60%, it would seem to be more prohibitive. It would basically say, any non food place, or place with a snack bar, but a place that is something other than a restaurant would still be off limits because of the alcohol/food ratio... but if it is just the 40% sales or less can be alcohol, then those places would be ok....

I'm going back to work....

You've got it.

But that's the problem.... the bills that have been introduced say 60% or more from food instead of 40$ or less from alcohol.