Gunning for Votes; Voting for Gunners

[Guest johnnyo]

Gunning for Votes; Voting for Gunners

Pro-gun bills generally advanced in legislative doings today - notable examples including measures to make secret the list of folks who have handgun carry permits and to declare that guns cannot be seized even in periods of martial law.

But there was an exception: Rep. Stacey Campfield's two bills let more people pack a pistol on college and university campuses. Those died in a House subcommittee with two of his Republican colleagues sitting on their hands and refusing to second a motion for passage.

The notion of sealing permit-holder records, by the way, is a legitimate policy issue. One can reasonably argue both sides (my inclination is to leave them as open records), The martial law bill (HB1778), pushed by House Republican Caucus Chairman Glen Casada, comes across as meaningless and inconsequential - albeit harmless - grandstanding.

As Casada explained to the sub, the Legislature last year passed a bill declaring that the governor cannot seize guns during a "state of emergency." OK, fine. A state of emergency is, for example, when a tornado blew through and caused a lot of damage.

But they regretfully forgot about "martial law" situations. Meaning a governor - or the president or whoever - could still take a gun away from someone if there's martial law in place.

Actually, when martial law is imposed, things have really gotten really, really bad -- we're talking Civil War occupation situation -- and the military is in control of everything, with basic rights suspended. In such a dramatic situation, an Army officer can order a city evacuated, homes destroyed, people arrested without the "probable cause" required under normal constitutional situations, and so on.

So, if Gen. Smith tells me to give him my rifle under martial law, is it going to matter if I say, "No. Thanks to the Tennessee General Assembly, I don't have to do so and refuse." It is submitted that such an occurrence is unlikely. But it sounds good, politically, and is inconsequential. So why not?

The Campfield bills, in contrast, are like the secret record stuff. They present legitimate and debatable policy issues. Remember Virginia Tech?

Trouble is, there wasn't much debate.

In reporter mode, yours truly decided to the high-interest thing was a confrontation between Campfield and the UT Knoxville police chief. This is what was sent along to editors, who may have had to trim for space reasons:

*Rep. Stacey Campfield's two "guns on campus" bills failed in a subcommittee Wednesday, setting up a hallway confrontation between the lawmaker and University of Tennessee Police Chief August Washington.

Washington was on hand to testify against the bills. As it turned out, the measures failed before he was called upon to speak because no member of the subcommittee would make the necessary seconding motion for a vote on the bill.

Both Campfield and Washington were interviewed afterwards by reporters in the hallway outside the committee room and they wound up in a brief confrontation.

"UT can't protect people on campus and they don't want people to protect themselves," Campfield said.

"That's not right," said Washington, also interviewed afterwards.

The Knoxville Republican legislator gave reporters copies of an email that he said illustrates how UT police cannot adequately protect people.

The email describes two men following a woman "Law School staff member" after she spotted them "behaving suspiciously" at Volunteer Hall Parking Garage. She got into the Law School building before the men reached her, the email says.

Washington said he was not familiar with the incident, but the campus is actually growing safer while "bringing in another big group of people carrying guns" would "make campus a lot more unsafe."

UT Police are in the process of obtaining full law enforcement accreditation, Washington said. UT Police Capt. Keith Lambert, who accompanied Washington, said "crimes against people" declined 42 percent on campus from 2007 to 2008 while property crimes were down 29 percent.

The only increase in crime reports, Lambert said, came in "officer-initiated" arrests, as in cases of drunken driving and drug possession.

One of Campfield's bills, Washington said, would have allowed "18-year-old kids with no training" to carry weapons on campus. He referred to a measure dealing with persons involved in the military, including ROTC cadets.

Campfield responded that Washington was wrong because gun-carrying priviledges are otherwise limited to persons aged 21 or over.

Campfield said he was "disheartened" with defeat of the bills in the House Criminal Practice Subcommittee, which has an even partisan balance - three Republicans and three Democrats. Rep. Judd Matheney, R-Tullahoma, made a motion for passage as required by parliamentary rules. But no one made the required "seconding" motion.

One of the bills, HB798, would have allowed full-time faculty and staff members who hold handgun carry permits to take their weapons on campus. The other, HB823, would have allowed active or former law enforcement officers and former or active military personnel, including Reserve Officer Training Corps cadets, to carry guns on campuses.*

Posted by Tom Humphrey on April 1, 2009 at 11:02 PM

[Guest TEBISH]

Gunning for Votes; Voting for Gunners

The other, HB823, would have allowed active or former law enforcement officers and former or active military personnel, including Reserve Officer Training Corps cadets, to carry guns on campuses.*

Posted by Tom Humphrey on April 1, 2009 at 11:02 PM

Yeah - because everybody all LEOs, Military Personnel, and especially ROTC cadets are highly trained in all types of weaponry. I think my avatar says it all.

[E4 No More]

Yeah - because everybody all LEOs, Military Personnel, and especially ROTC cadets are highly trained in all types of weaponry. I think my avatar says it all.

You forgot judges!