TN Permit Holders to be classed as LEOs?

[Grayfox54]

I just learned about this on another forum I visit. It appears that two bills have been introduced in the State Legislature that would classify Enhanced Handgun Permit Holders as Law Enforcement Officers. As I understand it, the purpose is to remove some of the restrictions on where we can carry. Basically, EHP holders would be able to carry anywhere LE are allowed. While I like that idea, there also appears to be much confusion about it as well.  Honestly I just don't see this as passing. 

Can anybody provide more info?  Just what do these bills really mean? 

Permit Holders to be LEO

[bobsguns]

I think it's pretty much as you've said. It doesn't allow for Gomer's famous "Citizen's arrest! Citizen's arrest!" for permit holders.

Gun grabbers are all blathering about guns being stolen from cars but they're silent when I point out the owners HAVE to leave them there because they can't take them in. Crickets from them.

I have mixed feelings on this bill. I think it should be cleaned up & tightened up a bit, IMO.

My .o2

[Garufa]

The purpose as I understand it is to allow EHP holders to carry wherever LEO can carry, as in places where private property owners and businesses have posted.

The optics of this bill are horrible and the bad press is really cranking up.

[Grayfox54]

1 hour ago, Garufa said:

The purpose as I understand it is to allow EHP holders to carry wherever LEO can carry, as in places where private property owners and businesses have posted.

AH! And there's the rub. We are NOT LEOs. I have no desire to be a de facto LEO.  I don't see how our 2nd Amendment rights can over rule a property owner's rights. Schools, government buildings and such, yes. But if a private property  owner chooses to post their property, No. Their house, they make the rules. 

Frankly, I don't see any way in hell this will pass. 

[bobsguns]

1 hour ago, Grayfox54 said:

I don't see how our 2nd Amendment rights can over rule a property owner's rights. Schools, government buildings and such, yes. But if a private property  owner chooses to post their property, No. Their house, they make the rules. 

Frankly, I don't see any way in hell this will pass. 

What about when private businesses had signs saying "whites only"? Was that right or wrong? Their rules, right?

If you open to the public, you get/have to serve the ENTIRE public, IMO. Maybe I don't want people with purple hair? I still have to serve them. Maybe I don't like the Irish like they did in the 1800s? I still have to serve them. 

But I agree this bill will pass when they serve ice cream in hell. 

[FUJIMO]

This was ran on local news several weeks back. My take (since we are in hate cop mode in the US ) is the ability to place more scrutiny and more accountability on a permit holder when a gun related incident occurs. Under those conditions it should pass with flying colors as its a bigger bullseye on believers in 2A. 

Edited February 19, 2022 by FUJIMO

[bobsguns]

36 minutes ago, FUJIMO said:

This was ran on local news several weeks back. My take (since we are in hate cop mode in the US ) is the ability to place more scrutiny and more accountability on a permit holder when a gun related incident occurs. Under those conditions it should pass with flying colors as its a bigger bullseye on believers in 2A. 

Given the amount of stories with no-knock raids on the WRONG addresses (often resulting in death), falsifying evidence & lying on the witness stand, videos of being complete assholes on traffic stops, I think we can at least acknowledge that the old days of Officer Friendly has long been buried, at least in the urban areas. There's just way, way too many cops who took the job for ego, power trip & lack of skills to do anything else, IMO. I know some personally & I wouldn't hire them to sweep my driveway, much less be a cop, sadly.

But this bill has no chance of going anywhere, IMO. It's political posturing for his constituents & not much else, IMO. 

[FUJIMO]

7 minutes ago, bobsguns said:

Given the amount of stories with no-knock raids on the WRONG addresses (often resulting in death), falsifying evidence & lying on the witness stand, videos of being complete assholes on traffic stops, I think we can at least acknowledge that the old days of Officer Friendly has long been buried, at least in the urban areas. There's just way, way too many cops who took the job for ego, power trip & lack of skills to do anything else, IMO. I know some personally & I wouldn't hire them to sweep my driveway, much less be a cop, sadly.

But this bill has no chance of going anywhere, IMO. It's political posturing for his constituents & not much else, IMO. 

You solidified my point

If you'd been on here any amount of time at all you'd understand the irony in your statement. 

[Worriedman]

Perhaps a reading of the actual bill, (which merely allows the Enhanced Permit holder to carry in such places as off duty officers) and not letting the MSM and FOP dictate the message would explain the intent of the bill and clear up the lies perpetrated in their messaging.  

The State decried the curriculum for the permit course, and have decided that said curriculum is with the money spent by the Citizen.  As such they have tendered a license for that special class to carry a firearm.

Officers can only exercise their "police powers" while "On the Job" per two Tennessee Supreme Court cases.  In Jamesena WHITE, et al. v. REVCO DISCOUNT DRUG CENTERS, INC., Decided: November 22, 2000,the court pointed out police officers in Tennessee do not possess the exclusive authority to make arrests, as private citizens possess this power in many of the same circumstances as officers on official duty.   See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-7-109 (1997) To the contrary, when officers are “off duty,” our statutes generally treat the officer as an ordinary private citizen and not as an agent or employee of the municipal police department under a general duty to keep the peace.   See, e.g., Tenn.Code Ann. § 38-8-351 (1997) (allowing officers to participate in political activities when “off-duty and acting as a private citizen,” but not when the officer is “on duty or acting in such officer's official capacity”);  Tenn.Code Ann. § 38-8-303 (1997) (making distinction between “the performance of the officer's official duties” and the officer's “off-duty [private] employment” for purposes of disclosure in official investigations).   Consequently, to the extent that a nature-of-the-act analysis focuses upon some continuous duty of police officers to keep the peace, that analysis is impractical in this state.

In Ezell v. Cockrell, 902 S.W.2d 394, 403 (Tenn.1995) (stating that an officer's ability to arrest at any time does not give rise to a duty to do so, but “only delineate authority and responsibility of police officers”), and a blanket rule declaring that police officers are under a never-ending duty to keep the peace is contrary to existing Tennessee law.

The bill in question then would simply allow the Enhance Permit hold to carry in locations that an off duty police officer can, as they are one and the same as declared by the Tennessee Supreme Court when off duty,.  If the TCA Code allows non trained designated law enforcement (judges) to have the same berth to carry as off duty officers, why not Enhanced Permit holders, as the Permit holder is never "On The Job"?

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/tn-supreme-court/1333232.html
https://law.justia.com/cases/tennessee/supreme-court/1995/902-s-w-2d-394.html

Edited February 19, 2022 by Worriedman

[bobsguns]

1 hour ago, FUJIMO said:

You solidified my point

If you'd been on here any amount of time at all you'd understand the irony in your statement. 

Your point: ____________________________________

My head: ...............................................................

LOL!

[FUJIMO]

Thanks for the clarification @Worriedman. What do you think the chances are of it passing?

[JustEd]

Please don't ban me....but,

It makes some sort of sense in today's homeless, drug addict, snatch and grab world.  While I have no intention of policing the world, the more good honest citizens with guns spread about, the better.

So here is the part where I get banned:   "Would  be willing to get more training and further vetting for the privilege of carrying in the aforementioned prohibited areas."

[Darrell]

1 hour ago, bobsguns said:

I think we can at least acknowledge that the old days of Officer Friendly has long been buried, at least in the urban areas

While I acknowledge that there are bad apples in LE, as in ANY trade or profession, I continue to respect those who take on the dangerous and necessary job.  Personally, I have never had a bad experience with any cop. Even when I've been pulled over and ticketed, I realized that the cops were doing their jobs and I brought those tickets onto myself by my own choice to speed. LE is a job that I sure wouldn't want to take on, but I am eternally grateful for the GOOD men and women who choose to do it.

[Worriedman]

18 minutes ago, JustEd said:

Please don't ban me....but,

It makes some sort of sense in today's homeless, drug addict, snatch and grab world.  While I have no intention of policing the world, the more good honest citizens with guns spread about, the better.

So here is the part where I get banned:   "Would  be willing to get more training and further vetting for the privilege of carrying in the aforementioned prohibited areas."

If someone could point out with empirical data that non criminals carrying would increase crime I might be up for increased training requirements.

I personally think that every Citizen should be allowed to attend the POST training, figure a reasonable cost and let me go.  My tax dollars pay for everyone else that gets to attend, why not me?  Graduate the class, carry everywhere.

Never forget the "Sheriff for Life" bill passed by the TN Legislature.  The Sheriff is the Chief Constitutional officer elected in each County and until the 90s was elected first and then required to attend POST Certification school.  The Sheriff's Association strong armed the GA into granting the requirement that ONLY POST certified individuals can seek that office, hence the Sheriff for Life status we now enjoy in TN.

The Sheriff's Association, the Chiefs of Police, the DAs and the TBI have opposed every attempt to reconstruct via statute what was stripped by the Legislature in 1823 and 1871 from the enumerated Rights recognized by the original Constitution in1796 re Right to Arms.

Edited February 19, 2022 by Worriedman

[Moped]

My thanks also for the clarification @Worriedman. I wish this bill were worded more clearly. at least it's name and summary. I never thought in a million years that it was meant to give someone like me, law enforcement powers, above what any normal citizen would have. That was drummed up by Gun Control Advocates as a scare tactic, just like how the streets were going to turn red with blood, when the HCP was first purposed here in Tennessee.  Something that is said whenever a Concealed Carry friendly bill is brought up in any state.

As for additional training, I would not be opposed to that either, but at a much cheaper rate than would presently apply. The cost of additional ammunition alone, right now, would set one back a bunch!  Throw in "Joe Expert's" training class (how the HCP System is currently carried out, in the private sector) and I could see the cost of getting a EHCP getting out of hand very quickly!  That being said, additional training is never a bad thing to my way of thinking.

[Grayfox54]

Please clarify. Exactly where would a EHP holder be able to carry that we currently can't?  Would or would not that include privately owned and posted property?  Specifically stores, restaurants, sports stadiums, concert halls  and other public venues. 

[bobsguns]

2 hours ago, JustEd said:

So here is the part where I get banned:   "Would  be willing to get more training and further vetting for the privilege of carrying in the aforementioned prohibited areas."

I don't necessarily disagree with that, BUT! I think there should be a few exceptions for that requirement, IMO. Someone with mil background, perhaps certain MOS'? Someone whom has had a permit for over 10 years with no FUBARs? Those sorts of things. I don't think extra training should be mandated upon those whom already have their permits & may not want to add the additional areas of carry?

As one whom has worked the inspection station at a gun range, NEVER underestimate the stupidity of the general public! Cops aren't generally any better either, IMO. They're not "gun guys". There's multiple cases where a cop drew their weapon, thinking it was a taser (their words, not mine) & fired it. A cop up in MN just was found guilty on that very thing. So training is a good thing, even among experienced shooters. That's why I like shooting matches & watching the "good" shooters, I always learn something at every match.

But as we keep writing, it'll never get out of committee, IMO. 

[bobsguns]

2 hours ago, Darrell said:

LE is a job that I sure wouldn't want to take on, but I am eternally grateful for the GOOD men and women who choose to do it.

As we all are. I have several friends whom are or were cops. I thought the world of Buford Tune of Nashville. But I despise the whole "blue wall of silence" of cops whom cover for those whom they KNOW should not be cops or even security guards for that matter. The whole "no-knock" warrant thing is completely out of control & multiple Metro cops were just up for disciplinary action for one. One or two got fired over it, IIRC?

The "asset forfeiture" thing over carrying cash is another perfect example of "theft by badge". Yes, I realize the various legislatures passed the law on that. But cops seizing people's cash & requiring them to spend $$$$ on a lawyer, go to court just to get their OWN $$$ back is horse manure. 

If cops would police their selves & get rid of the ones they KNOW are bad cops, there may not be all those civilian review boards, IMO.

My .o2

[bobsguns]

2 hours ago, Worriedman said:

I personally think that every Citizen should be allowed to attend the POST training, figure a reasonable cost and let me go.  My tax dollars pay for everyone else that gets to attend, why not me?  Graduate the class, carry everywhere.

I can hear the screams now were this proposed in the Assembly.  

 

Quote

Never forget the "Sheriff for Life" bill passed by the TN Legislature.  The Sheriff is the Chief Constitutional officer elected in each County and until the 90s was elected first and then required to attend POST Certification school.  The Sheriff's Association strong armed the GA into granting the requirement that ONLY POST certified individuals can seek that office, hence the Sheriff for Life status we now enjoy in TN.

I thought one could be a sheriff but had to gain certification within so many days of being elected? Or am I wrong on that?

I think it's a good idea for a sheriff to be POST qualified, IMO. I remember when I was little (I'm 63) & hearing older folks talk about rural sheriffs being barely able to sign their name, much less read a warrant. They got elected via political machines & not ability. Thankfully that's changed a great deal in almost everywhere.

[Grayfox54]

I keep hearing so much about cops being bad. Granted, a few are. Most aren't. 

As you know I worked as a mechanic for my city for 25 years. Cops drive patrol cars. So it was quite normal to have cops in and out of the shop on a daily basis. I got to know quite a few of them personally. I can tell you for a fact that the vast majority of our Police Officers are good, decent people who have just chosen a tough way to make a living. I know I couldn't do it. 

The few bad ones we've had over the years didn't last long. 

I'm sure its different in large cities with higher crime rates. I know Memphis is so desperate for officers that they've lowered their standards to rock bottom. Truth is they have a lot of complete idiots in uniform.  But that doesn't mean that they're bad or crooked. They are trying to do the right thing. 

 I still firmly believe that the vast majority of Police officers all over this country are good people. Its only the bad ones you hear about. 

 

[bobsguns]

2 hours ago, Grayfox54 said:

 I still firmly believe that the vast majority of Police officers all over this country are good people. Its only the bad ones you hear about. 

 

No argument there. But the problem as *I* see it is the good ones keep covering for the bad ones time & time again. No one else does that to the extent that I know. Certainly not at any job I've worked at. If someone was drunk on the job, he got mentioned to a supervisor. If someone was a thief or did crappy work, it got mentioned. But cops don't do that. And that needs to change, IMO.

[Worriedman]

6 hours ago, Grayfox54 said:

Please clarify. Exactly where would a EHP holder be able to carry that we currently can't?  Would or would not that include privately owned and posted property?  Specifically stores, restaurants, sports stadiums, concert halls  and other public venues. 

It would allow that. All Parks as well.

 

[Worriedman]

6 hours ago, bobsguns said:

I can hear the screams now were this proposed in the Assembly.  

 

I thought one could be a sheriff but had to gain certification within so many days of being elected? Or am I wrong on that?

I think it's a good idea for a sheriff to be POST qualified, IMO. I remember when I was little (I'm 63) & hearing older folks talk about rural sheriffs being barely able to sign their name, much less read a warrant. They got elected via political machines & not ability. Thankfully that's changed a great deal in almost everywhere.

You are wrong, since the bill got passed, ONLY POST Certified LEs may seek that office.

Tenn. Code Ann.§ 8-8-102
https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/commerce/documents/post/resources/Sheriff_TCA_Qualifications.pdf

Edited February 19, 2022 by Worriedman

[Worriedman]

6 hours ago, bobsguns said:

 

But as we keep writing, it'll never get out of committee, IMO. 

Hunting over a baited field...

[Worriedman]

6 hours ago, bobsguns said:

I thought one could be a sheriff but had to gain certification within so many days of being elected? Or am I wrong on that?

I think it's a good idea for a sheriff to be POST qualified, IMO. 

That is incorrect, only POST certified may apply, the rub is you have to be sent to that school by a LE organization.  A lot of good administrators are precluded from running for what was always a political office.
 
I think anyone should be able to run and then if they can pass the school, take office.  It was only 200+ years that was the rule in TN.  More Police State control of the Citizen.

https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/commerce/documents/post/resources/Sheriff_TCA_Qualifications.pdf

Edited February 19, 2022 by Worriedman