What gun laws would you like to see passed in TN

[billyblazes]

As the title asks, what is on your legislative wish list?

For me, I think top of my list is preemption.  I would like to see the State be the sole legislative authority for the State so as to prevent municipalities from making their own laws.  That would apply to everything from prohibited locations to what is allowed for a private recreational shooting range.

[Alleycat72]

A repeal of all of them would be a start. 

[billyblazes]

37 minutes ago, alleycat72 said:

A repeal of all of them would be a start. 

Hell yeah!  Especially NFA at the Federal level. 

[DaveTN]

At this point in time, I hope we can keep what we have. But if the upcoming elections go wrong, and with city government bowing down to the threats of violent thugs, that could all change; none of which I think many of us would like. I also want absolutely no federal involvement in my ability to be armed. NFA won’t be repealed, I just hope they don’t add a bunch of firearms to it.

I’d like to see the laws changed to be able to use deadly force against burglars without having to wait for them to make entry into our homes.

 

[nightrunner]

Well, permitless carry was about to be voted on right before COVID shut down the legislature. 
 

That, along with preemption, would go along way. Add those of us with a permit to carry EVERYWHERE no restrictions.

 

Then we just need someone willing to potentially sacrifice their freedom and take the BATFE to court over the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act and get us a legal precedent for it and we’d be sitting pretty good IMO

[billyblazes]

1 hour ago, DaveTN said:

At this point in time, I hope we can keep what we have. But if the upcoming elections go wrong, and with city government bowing down to the threats of violent thugs, that could all change; none of which I think many of us would like.

I’m more than a little concerned with how the larger cities of Nashville and Knoxville are leaning more and more left. Maybe Chattanooga, too?  I’m thinking liberal anti-gun policies are getting too much of a foothold due to the blue influx. 

[billyblazes]

“Then we just need someone willing to potentially sacrifice their freedom and take the BATFE to court over the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act and get us a legal precedent for it and we’d be sitting pretty good IMO“

I’d be concerned how the current SCOTUS may rule on that. Roberts has been flakey. 

Edited July 14, 2020 by billyblazes

[DaveTN]

1 hour ago, nightrunner said:

Then we just need someone willing to potentially sacrifice their freedom and take the BATFE to court over the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act and get us a legal precedent for it and we’d be sitting pretty good IMO

 

1 hour ago, billyblazes said:

I’d be concerned how the current SCOTUS may rule on that. Roberts has been flakey. 

Tennessee’s is basically the same as Montana. The 9th Federal District has shot down Montana’s and the SCOTUS has refused to hear an appeal. The SCOTUS would possibly hear it if we had a conflicting ruling out of our 6th, or some other Federal District hearing the same type case. But it appears to me with the latest cases, they are giving the states wide leeway on “reasonable restrictions” and don’t really want to get into ruling on whether the restrictions implemented are reasonable or not. The SCOTUS refused to hear 10 different appeals last month on firearms restrictions. That says a lot.

Here is the info on Montana.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana_Firearms_Freedom_Act

 

[chances R]

6 hours ago, billyblazes said:

As the title asks, what is on your legislative wish list?

For me, I think top of my list is preemption.  I would like to see the State be the sole legislative authority for the State so as to prevent municipalities from making their own laws.  That would apply to everything from prohibited locations to what is allowed for a private recreational shooting range.

That is the way it is now.  Only the legislature can create firearm law.

[billyblazes]

22 minutes ago, chances R said:

That is the way it is now.  Only the legislature can create firearm law.

However I read often of people asking "Can I shoot on my property in Wherever, TN?" Then I read the replies of "Not if you're in city limits." Or "Go speak with the local Sheriff's office."  This tells me municipalities are writing laws effecting firearms.

I also recall reading Knoxville making firearms prohibited in certain buildings and venues.  This seems to be legislation at a local level going above & beyond what the State has legislated.

[chances R]

and I think, for the most part, all of those issues are covered in the state laws.  Reasonable not to be able to discharge firearms in the city limits.  The building issue is addressed by state law, but that does not keep people from having questions.  There are some reasonable restrictions anticipated by state law.

[Alleycat72]

The federal government says that pot is illegal and yet I have never heard of anyone getting arrested in states where pot is legal. Gun laws should be treated the same way. Pot gives us a legal precedent.

[billyblazes]

40 minutes ago, chances R said:

and I think, for the most part, all of those issues are covered in the state laws.  Reasonable not to be able to discharge firearms in the city limits.  The building issue is addressed by state law, but that does not keep people from having questions.  There are some reasonable restrictions anticipated by state law.

No reason the State, under preemption if it existed, could not put forth a law that reads:

”Discharging firearm in public or on residential property.
(4) Any person who recreationally discharges a firearm outdoors, including target shooting, in an area that
the person knows or reasonably should know is primarily residential in nature and that has a residential
density of one or more dwelling units per acre, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as
provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. This subsection does not apply:

(b) If, under the circumstances, the discharge does not pose a reasonably foreseeable risk to life, safety, or
property; or
(c) To a person who accidentally discharges a firearm.”

With regard to your statement about what’s “reasonable” such a statute would limit the confusion of moving from one area of the State to another, inside of city limits or outside of those city limits. 

[DaveTN]

12 hours ago, alleycat72 said:

The federal government says that pot is illegal and yet I have never heard of anyone getting arrested in states where pot is legal. Gun laws should be treated the same way. Pot gives us a legal precedent.

On any given day the Feds could go in and arrest and seize the assets of anyone selling pot. That’s not a legal precedent I want to see applied to guns.

[TomInMN]

I actually would like to see a requirement that all FFL holders (not just pawn shops) run the serial number of used firearms in their inventory through a stolen firearms database, and report any that are flagged. It wouldn't be a perfect solution, but it might help get some stolen firearms back to their owners.

[Alleycat72]

41 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

On any given day the Feds could go in and arrest and seize the assets of anyone selling pot. That’s not a legal precedent I want to see applied to guns.

I should be able to purchase anything that falls under NFA without a stamp or 300 day waiting period. Why is that different than what's happening with pot? As long as Tennessee says it's legal, it should be legal. 

[DaveTN]

40 minutes ago, alleycat72 said:

I should be able to purchase anything that falls under NFA without a stamp or 300 day waiting period. Why is that different than what's happening with pot? As long as Tennessee says it's legal, it should be legal. 

It is legal under Tennessee law, although it specifically says it does not apply to machine guns, and some other things. I have no idea why it hasn’t been tested in our 6th Federal District court. I assume it is either because no one wants to spend the money to test it, or they think the ruling will be the same as the Montana ruling.

The state says it’s legal and the Feds say its not and they will put you in prison. The SCOTUS hasn’t heard a case on it, and it doesn’t appear they will.

The Ninth Circuit panel unanimously ruled that Congress could regulate the internal manufacture of firearms within Montana because the creation and circulation of such firearms could reasonably be expected to impact the market for firearms nationally. I suspect the SCOTUS would rule the same.

With pot, many of those states voted on it in a public vote. A vote on machine guns wouldn’t pass in Tennessee or any other state. But it would open the door for a vote on AR’s. I have my doubts that would pass.

Why hasn’t it been tried by a manufacturer? Because you would need to find a manufacturer of firearms, suppressors, SBR’s, etc.  to sell you one. They would lose their FFL and be charged with a Federal Weapons charge is my guess why it hasn’t happened.

As I said, all that would need to happen is test it in the 6th. If they ruled the TFFA is constitutional and you had two Federal Districts disagreeing, then I suspect the SCOTUS would hear the case. But it still wouldn’t get you machine guns; it would get you suppressors and SBR’s.

Again, I don’t know for sure why it hasn’t been tested here.

[FUJIMO]

2 hours ago, TomInMN said:

I actually would like to see a requirement that all FFL holders (not just pawn shops) run the serial number of used firearms in their inventory through a stolen firearms database, and report any that are flagged. It wouldn't be a perfect solution, but it might help get some stolen firearms back to their owners.

My understanding was if any FFL has one "on the books" (bought it through his/her FFL) that it would be ran when it sold and maybe on the intake if from a private seller. At least thats how my FFL does it. Regardless make no mistake if its stolen it will wind up in the hands of the local PD and from there, well, good luck

[Defender]

Hearing Protection Act.

[billyblazes]

14 minutes ago, Defender said:

Hearing Protection Act.

YES!!!!! If with the stroke of a pen bump stocks could be outlawed, certainly the HPA could be written into law/executive action