Shelby County DA speaks out against governor’s permitless gun plan

[The Legion]

https://wreg.com/news/shelby-county-da-says-governors-permitless-gun-plan-a-bad-idea-for-memphis/

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — Gov. Bill Lee announced his support Thursday for legislation that would remove handgun permit requirements in Tennessee, but the plan is drawing criticism from some local officials.

Lee, and the NRA, both say the so-called constitutional carry law would secure Second-Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens. Sixteen states currently have similar laws in place. The bill also would increase penalties for stealing guns.

But Shelby County District Attorney Amy Weirich said the proposal is likely to cause problems for local law enforcement.

“As District Attorney of a large urban area, I am opposed to it,” Weirich said. “I cannot think of any good reason why we would want to allow permitless open carry.”

Obtaining a handgun carry permit in Tennessee is an easy process, Weirich said, made easier by recent legislation that allows residents to obtain concealed-carry permits after a 90-minute online course. But certain people like convicted felons can’t get a permit.

Without permits, officers won’t be able to differentiate between someone who can legally carry a gun and someone who can’t, Weirich said.

Weirich compared the proposal to another recent Tennessee law that allows residents to carry guns in cars, which law enforcement officials in Memphis say has led to an increase in auto burglaries and more guns in the hands of criminals. Memphis’ police director has called for its repeal.

“We’ve seen, here in Shelby County, great issues for law enforcement and public safety because of guns in cars,” Weirich said. “This is just going to add to that problem and make it almost impossible for law enforcement to know if somebody with a weapon is a convicted felon and prohibited person.”

Similar bills were blocked in Tennessee in the past, but because Republicans control both chambers of Tennessee’s General Assembly, Lee’s support of the measure makes its passage more likely.

State Sen. Raumesh Akbari, a Democrat who represents Memphis, said she will oppose any permitless carry legislation.

Akbari said after Missouri passed a permitless carry bill in January 2017, the city of St. Louis experienced a nearly 25 percent increase in the rate of aggravated assaults with a gun in 2017 compared to 2016, according to research by gun control group Everytown For Gun Safety.

“Tennesseans support the 2nd Amendment, but they also believe firmly in responsible gun ownership and policies, like mandatory background checks, that promote accountability,” Akbari said in a statement. “Permitless carry is a bad idea that endangers every Tennessean.”

[TGO David]

She seems like a real credit to the people of Memphis. 

 

[mikegideon]

3 hours ago, TGO David said:

She seems like a real credit to the people of Memphis. 

 

But, if we just show our criminals enough love...

[Chucktshoes]

18 minutes ago, mikegideon said:

But, if we just show our criminals enough love...

That’s not her schtick at all. She’s actually a pretty hard nosed prosecutor that a lot of you law & order folks would like on any other day. But what she really is more than that, is a hard line statist. She has way more faith in government bureaucrats like herself running people’s lives than respecting their liberty to run their own lives as they see fit. 
 

 

[FUJIMO]

"Without permits, officers won’t be able to differentiate between someone who can legally carry a gun and someone who can’t, Weirich said"

If only officers had some handy device  where they could punch in information and it tell them if you were a felon or not....

 

[Grayfox54]

Chucktshoes is correct. Weirich is a good DA and pushes for harsh penalties. However, she also recognizes that memphis is a liberal cesspool. She knows which side her bread is buttered on. 

[DWARREN123]

Want to bet on her political leanings?

[Chucktshoes]

1 hour ago, DWARREN123 said:

Want to bet on her political leanings?

She was the deputy DA under and protege of Bill Gibbons. You might want to take that into account before you start taking guesses. 

Y’all need to stop letting that R next to somebody’s name fool you into believing that they are a freedom loving believer in individual rights. It ain’t the case most of the time. For the most part it doesn’t matter what letter is next to somebody’s name. Those folks in Memphis, Nashville, and Washington DC believe that they know better than you do how to run your life. Amy Weirich is a Republican, but that doesn’t mean she believes in or supports your individual rights. At least not without a government permission slip.

Edited February 28, 2020 by Chucktshoes

[Capbyrd]

4 hours ago, FUJIMO said:

"Without permits, officers won’t be able to differentiate between someone who can legally carry a gun and someone who can’t, Weirich said"

If only officers had some handy device  where they could punch in information and it tell them if you were a felon or not....

 

That’s not what she means.   Seeing a gun is probable cause.  If you remove the need for a permit, no more probably cause for the stop.  

[Chucktshoes]

29 minutes ago, Capbyrd said:

That’s not what she means.   Seeing a gun is probable cause.  If you remove the need for a permit, no more probably cause for the stop.  

Bingo! 
 

No crime, no reason for a Terry stop. 

[FUJIMO]

4 hours ago, Capbyrd said:

That’s not what she means.   Seeing a gun is probable cause.  If you remove the need for a permit, no more probably cause for the stop.  

Sorry, I did misunderstand.

 

Edited February 28, 2020 by FUJIMO

[DaveTN]

10 hours ago, Capbyrd said:

That’s not what she means.   Seeing a gun is probable cause.  If you remove the need for a permit, no more probably cause for the stop.

 

9 hours ago, Chucktshoes said:

Bingo! No crime, no reason for a Terry stop. 

Probable cause isn’t needed for a stop, just reasonable suspicion. That’s a pretty low bar and its not gone just because it's legal for anyone to carry a gun.

 If a Police Officer stops someone; I’m sure they will be able to articulate in court why they stopped them. Part of that reasonable suspicion may be seeing a gun or the printing of a gun.

I don’t see how her concerns about legal carry, (I’m assuming she means felon in possession) are a big deal. It’s been many years since I’ve worked a LE computer, but we could not tell if a person was a convicted felon by simply running a driver’s license or a check for wanted. We would have to run a criminal background check to find that out. It took a little longer and it cost our department more; but it could be done. I don’t know what the situation is now a days, maybe a LEO can fill us in? If they check a person, they check okay, and they let them go, they then find out later the person is a convicted felon; they can go back, get them and charge them.

If I’m not mistaken “Felon in possession” is mandatory prison time in this state. So you will know if they are a felon with a gun; they will run and try to ditch the gun (along with their drugs) before they are caught. 

[Chucktshoes]

8 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

 

Probable cause isn’t needed for a stop, just reasonable suspicion. That’s a pretty low bar and its not gone just because it's legal for anyone to carry a gun.

 If a Police Officer stops someone; I’m sure they will be able to articulate in court why they stopped them. Part of that reasonable suspicion may be seeing a gun or the printing of a gun.

I don’t see how her concerns about legal carry, (I’m assuming she means felon in possession) are a big deal. It’s been many years since I’ve worked a LE computer, but we could not tell if a person was a convicted felon by simply running a driver’s license or a check for wanted. We would have to run a criminal background check to find that out. It took a little longer and it cost our department more; but it could be done. I don’t know what the situation is now a days, maybe a LEO can fill us in? If they check a person, they check okay, and they let them go, they then find out later the person is a convicted felon; they can go back, get them and charge them.

If I’m not mistaken “Felon in possession” is mandatory prison time in this state. So you will know if they are a felon with a gun; they will run and try to ditch the gun (along with their drugs) before they are caught. 

The courts have ruled that in a state where the open carrying of a firearm is a legal activity, it does not provide sufficient PC for a Terry stop. So, if TN passes Con Carry, police will no longer be allowed to use that as a reason to initiate a stop, or at least cannot detain or compel a citizen to interact with them because of the firearm. There’s no RAS of a crime because unlike now, carrying a firearm won’t be a crime. 

Edited February 28, 2020 by Chucktshoes

[tnhawk]

18 hours ago, TGO David said:

She seems like a real credit to the people of Memphis. 

 

Crime is good business for some.

It’s crime drops, her case load drops.

[BHunted]

Just my thoughts..

1: Among other things, "R" stands for Republican but also stands for "RINO"... I've learned over the years, that most upper brass LE when promoted, slowly turn into politicians. 

2: If they amend a rule, (correct me if I'm wrong), just adding to the office's interaction, "are you carrying a weapon?", which I believe is always a good idea. Felon criminals or any, that carry weapons will never admit to having one on their person. You are not required to tell a LEO in this state, that you are carrying in any scenario, but it is wise to do so.

I agree that this can be problematic to the state. But it is what it is. Time will tell. Use of other states stats, I'm sure gave them insight. By no means does it create a western shootout state. Other anti 2a states, including NJ, (a may issue state but rarely does), from where I lived for over 60 years, was worried that our town would become a shootout town because we opened a gun range. We emphasized that law abiding citizens do not create a bad scenario for the most part. In fact, most are very well versed and trained with their firearms.
Whether required or not, I'd advise training always. I told my wife, she will not carry without practicing regularly out of fear she'll shoot me by accident, (or on purpose, lmao)...

[DaveTN]

11 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

The courts have ruled that in a state where the open carrying of a firearm is a legal activity, it does not provide sufficient PC for a Terry stop. So, if TN passes Con Carry, police will no longer be allowed to use that as a reason to initiate a stop, or at least cannot detain or compel a citizen to interact with them because of the firearm. 

I know you don’t believe this, but I doubt many cops have stopped people simply because they have a firearm. Other activities or factors coupled with a gun could lead to a stop.

However, we could argue probable cause or reasonable suspicion all day long, the bottom line is the Officer will articulate it in court if necessary or he won’t, and a Judge will rule.

A Police Officer should never need to violate someone’s Constitutional rights to do their job. Would you and I agree on a case by case basis if that had occurred? Of course not.

[DaveTN]

38 minutes ago, BHunted said:

1: Among other things, "R" stands for Republican but also stands for "RINO"... I've learned over the years, that most upper brass LE when promoted, slowly turn into politicians. 

I would agree with that within larger departments and to the extent of the Chiefs, Asst Chiefs, or Sheriff’s. But most Command Officers, Police Officers, and Deputies I know or have worked with support citizens carrying guns. Of course, there are some that don’t, and they are the ones that will be used as examples.

It always pizzes me off when people say the cops don’t support carry because some LE group didn’t support it. The International Association of Chiefs of Police, The National Association of Chiefs of Police, The National Sheriffs' Association, those are political groups that do not represent rank and file LEO’s.

Groups like the PBA or FOP represent cops and most of those group support armed citizens. Of course you find bills where their opinion didn’t go the way you thought it should. We have that right here on this very forum. We have folks that don’t want an option that may allow more Tennesseans to carry, because they are worried about their ability to carry in some other state. We have folks that don’t want Constitutional carry because they are concerned people won’t be trained (like they are now??) or because it may impact privileges they purchase from the state.

38 minutes ago, BHunted said:

2: If they amend a rule, (correct me if I'm wrong), just adding to the office's interaction, "are you carrying a weapon?", which I believe is always a good idea. Felon criminals or any, that carry weapons will never admit to having one on their person. You are not required to tell a LEO in this state, that you are carrying in any scenario, but it is wise to do so.

Whether legal or not you always have a decision to make when being stopped by an Officer; if you are carrying a gun. Right now it isn’t required by law for you to do so. I’m notifying; but that’s my personal choice based on my knowledge from having been a Police Officer.

 

[tacops]

19 hours ago, The Legion said:

Akbari said after Missouri passed a permitless carry bill in January 2017, the city of St. Louis experienced a nearly 25 percent increase in the rate of aggravated assaults with a gun in 2017 compared to 2016, according to research by gun control group Everytown For Gun Safety.

Oh yeah, you can take those statistics to the bank...much like a counterfeit $100 bill. 

[chances R]

12 hours ago, Chucktshoes said:

She was the deputy DA under and protege of Bill Gibbons. You might want to take that into account before you start taking guesses. 

Y’all need to stop letting that R next to somebody’s name fool you into believing that they are a freedom loving believer in individual rights. It ain’t the case most of the time. For the most part it doesn’t matter what letter is next to somebody’s name. Those folks in Memphis, Nashville, and Washington DC believe that they know better than you do how to run your life. Amy Weirich is a Republican, but that doesn’t mean she believes in or supports your individual rights. At least not without a government permission slip.

Don't forget Knoxville in that list.  Two Liberal mayors in a row; just like any other big city going down the tube.

[DaveTN]

21 hours ago, The Legion said:

Akbari said after Missouri passed a permitless carry bill in January 2017, the city of St. Louis experienced a nearly 25 percent increase in the rate of aggravated assaults with a gun in 2017 compared to 2016, according to research by gun control group Everytown For Gun Safety.

 

1 hour ago, tacops said:

Oh yeah, you can take those statistics to the bank...much like a counterfeit $100 bill. 

I looked to see if that was true. Below is the FBI chart for violent crime reported to St. Louis Police Department.  It appears to me crime was dropping steadily from 2008 to 2013. It appears that something happened at the beginning of 2013 to start an increase. Then it appears something happened at the beginning of 2017 to start a decrease.

For what it's worth, SLMPD does have all the info available online. But I could not find it by year, only by month. They do also list agg assaults with firearms separate from others. But it would take importing 24 months of data, sorting it, and removing multiple charges during the same offense to get a good indication of what happened, and see if that claim is accurate. From the graph below it would appear that claim is hogwash.

[chances R]

It would not surprise me to find Agg. Ass. increase, but the circumstances involving the charge would be pertinent.  For example, pulling your weapon on someone breaking into your car without any other circumstances known could be AA.  Same for pulling your gun on a shoplifter.  Those type of charges could be expected by those that are carrying but ignorant of the law.

[DaveTN]

18 minutes ago, chances R said:

It would not surprise me to find Agg. Ass. increase, but the circumstances involving the charge would be pertinent.  For example, pulling your weapon on someone breaking into your car without any other circumstances known could be AA.  Same for pulling your gun on a shoplifter.  Those type of charges could be expected by those that are carrying but ignorant of the law.

It would surprise me to see agg assault increase. Unless it truly did increase as a crime.

Agg assault is a crime. Pulling a gun on someone breaking into your car isn’t agg assault in most states that I am aware of. Shooting them is…usually. It wouldn’t be reported in crime stats unless the Officer thought it was a crime.

I don’t remember ever going on a call where someone pulled a gun on a shoplifter. I would give them wide leeway if they did. So I doubt that would change the numbers much. (But yes, I’m sure you can find some on the internet)

Keep in mind agg assaults are usually a crime and there is an arrest. Homicides, not necessarily. So if armed home owners started killing more burglars breaking into their homes, or armed drivers started killing more thugs during car jackings; homicides rates would increase. But that wouldn’t necessarily give a good indication of what happened. Homicides that were justified are routinely included in crime statistics.

[KahrMan]

Let's not forget that you can make numbers say pretty much anything you want depending on how you look at them.  Dave your chart shows that all violent crime went up approx 7.5% from 2016, 6000 incidents, to 2017, 6450 incidents.  Her claim was the agg assault with a gun went up 25%.  Unless all categories within all violent crime went up exactly 7.5% then some went up less and some more to equal the 7.5% increase overall.

What is not shared is how many incidents the agg assault with gun represent.  If you had 8 incidents in 2016 and 10 in 2017 then guess what, it went up 25%.  I am kinda a numbers guy and whenever someone gets specific with a description and a percentage, like agg assault with a gun up 25%, I get very skeptical.  

 

She could have just as easily said that all violent crime dropped almost 10% from 2016 to 2018.  That is not the story she want to push so she cherry picks numbers to bolster her argument.

[DaveTN]

18 minutes ago, KahrMan said:

Let's not forget that you can make numbers say pretty much anything you want depending on how you look at them.  Dave your chart shows that all violent crime went up approx 7.5% from 2016, 6000 incidents, to 2017, 6450 incidents.  Her claim was the agg assault with a gun went up 25%.  Unless all categories within all violent crime went up exactly 7.5% then some went up less and some more to equal the 7.5% increase overall.

What is not shared is how many incidents the agg assault with gun represent.  If you had 8 incidents in 2016 and 10 in 2017 then guess what, it went up 25%.  I am kinda a numbers guy and whenever someone gets specific with a description and a percentage, like agg assault with a gun up 25%, I get very skeptical.  

She could have just as easily said that all violent crime dropped almost 10% from 2016 to 2018.  That is not the story she want to push so she cherry picks numbers to bolster her argument.

St. Louis puts out good info. You can see the number of assaults with a firearm (along with every other crime). But the downloaded info is monthly, not yearly. You can delete out all the other crimes, and delete out the multiple offenses at the same time, and you would have your numbers. You would also have to decide what to do with Homicides. But you would have to do that 24 times to compare 2 years. I didn’t care that much; I’m pretty sure they are not being truthful. (EverytownMothersAgainstGunsSoOnAndSoForth)

[KahrMan]

6 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

 I’m pretty sure they are not being truthful. (EverytownMothersAgainstGunsSoOnAndSoForth)

You know how you can tell a politician is lying....