Some nonsense from The Tennessean

[nb forrest]

This article is just ignorant.

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090313/MICRO03040505/90313018/1621/MICRO0304

[Guest frankcostanza]

Bun Bills eh? Morons.

[DavidD]

I refuse to click on the link so there is no confusion about how I feel about the Tennessean. Can you post the article here?

[Guest jmac]

I refuse to click on the link so there is no confusion about how I feel about the Tennessean. Can you post the article here?

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090313/MICRO03040505/90313018/1621/MICRO0304

The Tennessean’s View: Bun bills create danger, not safety

The simple fact that some lawmakers think it's fine for people to legally carry guns into restaurants that serve alcohol shows the lack of thinking behind a list of gun bills making their way through the legislature.

A provision that says people with permits may carry guns into restaurants where booze is available, as long as they're not drinking, invites deadly situations. Legislators have already talked in detail about some of the situations that can arise, and the legislation has been altered to include an 11 p.m. curfew. Why anyone believes inserting a curfew, regardless of the timing, will make the bill more sensible is beyond comprehension. The presence of guns and alcohol are a dangerous mix, no matter the time. The measure does say the law wouldn't apply to establishments that post signs prohibiting guns, but pity the folks who are just looking for a quiet dinner. They would have to be mindful of the restaurant's rules and make sure they know what time it is. The onus is on the innocent people who simply want to eat.

The proposal has come up before, but the legislature has always shown far better judgment than to pass such a law. But with Republicans holding the majority in both chambers of the legislature, such measures have gained new life, and some lawmakers seem determined to create life-and-death situations in public.

The restaurant bill is not the only misguided missile in the gun legislation. It's only one of a group of seriously flawed measures. They include:

>> Allowing permit holders to carry guns into state parks. At one time, the proposal included local parks, too, but there was considerable concern raised about the dangers of introducing guns into situations in local parks, where tempers can flare at sports events, which endangers children as well as adults. Some lawmakers saw the need to keep guns illegal in local parks, but the same tensions that arise in local parks certainly arise in state parks. Guns shouldn't be in public parks.

>> Making gun-carry permit records confidential. Some lawmakers have argued that since lists of gun permit holders have been published in databases, the lists should be made confidential and that fines should be assessed for violations. That's an overreaction the public shouldn't stand for. Such a move would be unconstitutional and would prevent the public from knowing information about people involved in gun crimes. How can the public know for sure that permits are being issued to the right people?

>> Allowing gun permit holders to carry handguns into state wildlife management areas. This bill has already run into complications with how it will fit into hunting guidelines. Lawmakers say such issues can be ironed out, but the fact such legislation is constantly creating new problems should be evidence enough that legislators should rethink their whole approach to gun legislation.

In recent years, Tennessee has adopted gun-carry laws under the belief that this will make people safe and prevent crime. As those laws have been adopted, people are discovering it's inconvenient when they're carrying weapons and want to enter places like parks and restaurants. Their inconvenience is causing them to entertain dangerous legislation. If lawmakers can pass laws that guarantee gun carriers will always make perfect decisions, that guns will never be mishandled, that guns will never get into the wrong hands, that guns will never endanger an innocent bystander or that guns will never harm a child, perhaps the package of gun bills would make some sense. As it is, this trend is nonsense. The proposals should be dropped.

Edited March 13, 2009 by jmac

[Guest trikerjay]

nonsense. plain and simple. sounds like california thinking.

later jay

[Guest Astra900]

I hope the Tennesseean fades into death and obscurity much like the Nashville Banner. I wouldn't even use the Tnean to line a rat cage.

[Guest Jcochran88]

Well I was an active subscriber. "Was" is the important part here.

[Guest EasilyObsessed]

The Tennessean’s View: Bun bills create danger, not safety

I think all Buns are inherently dangerous and should be banned.

At least the Tennessean employs some top notch proofreaders.

[DavidD]

Thanks jmac, same old crap. Glad I didn't click and make them think I really gave a damn what they print.

[Guest GhostHunter]

This guy was thinking of Buns because evidently that's where his head was at when he wrote this garbage!

[Okey]

I canceled my subscription today.

Okey

[Guest HexHead]

I think all Buns are inherently dangerous and should be banned.

At least the Tennessean employs some top notch proofreaders.

I had to look to see if they were taken over by The Onion.

I wish these bills would hurry up and come up for a floor vote. It appears the Tennessean and Commercial Appeal are going to run these biased, inaccurate fear mongering articles everyday until they do and the Governor signs them or just lets them become law after 30 days. They're trying really hard to get the loons that are mostly commenting on the articles to bombard their representatives and then the governor's office.

Edited March 14, 2009 by HexHead

[Guest dtandy]

I called this week and canceled my subscription. Within a week of subscribing (about 6 months ago) I noticed based on their political reporting that the Tennessean was clearly biased towards the left. I nearly canceled my subscription at that point. I wish I had!

[Guest mark_justmark]

. . . well, just these parts.

" innocent people who simply want to eat."

That includes includes HCP holders!

"...the legislation has been altered to include an 11 p.m. curfew. Why anyone believes inserting a curfew, regardless of the timing, will make the bill more sensible is beyond comprehension."

Why 11? Just allow it at all times. Could an argument be made that most robberies are likely to happen around when the restaurant is closing?

[Guest billwilly73]

Who is more of a danger to "innocent people" a permit holder eating dinner with his family and not drinking, or the guy eating and drinking then gets into his car and drives impaired????

I don't know the numbers but I bet all the :koolaid:Kool-Aid:koolaid: you can drink that there are more "innocent people" killed by drunk drivers than permit holders with a gun.

Just my 2 pennies

[Guest grimel]

This article is just ignorant.

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090313/MICRO03040505/90313018/1621/MICRO0304

How about we try something different and only post articles from The Tennessean that make sense or aren't ignorant. Might take a decade or so to post a link ....