Restaurant Carry HB0962 To Be Voted On Today 04/06/09

[Guest TEBISH]

I couldn't care less about the 11pm curfew. I eat early and am usually in bed by 10pm.

Once the naysayers have been proven wrong again, it will be easier to get the curfew removed than with the uncertainty about it now. In the mean time, I'll be enjoying my meals out.

July 1 would be nice!

In bed by 10pm - what are you doing out so late? Seriously - if I'm still not in bed by the end of "Two and a Half Men" every night I feel accomplished.

I need to rewatch the video and write down all of the quotes against the bill to reveal the true stupidity. Also I'd like to count up all of the times that they would say "I'm all for the 2nd Amendment - but...." but I'm afraid I'd burn up any standard calculator and I don't feel like creating an excel document.

[Guest truthsayer]

I hope they can get the curfew lifted. I would love to be able to legally carry while at work.

[Guest JavaGuy]

Some of you have wondered what the process is for a proposed piece of legislation, e.g. HB0962, to become a law.

Here's how it works...

Bill to Law - TN General Assembly

Glossary

Glossary of Terms - TN General Assembly

Common abbreviations used by the TN Legislature

Glossary of Terms - TN General Assembly

[Fallguy]

I hope the Senate doesn't strip out the curfew. I really don't want to give Naifeh and the House another bite at the apple. Stuff happens.

We can address the curfew issue later on, when the naysayers have been proven wrong.

I don't think they could kill the whole bill. Only vote as whether to concur or not concur with any changes made to the bill in the senate.

From How a bill becomes law

If a bill passes one house and is amended in the other, the bill goes back to the house where it was originally passed for action on the amendment. The first house may vote to concur or not to concur. If it concurs in the amendment(s), the bill follows through for the governor's approval; but if the first house refuses to concur, the bill goes back to the house where the amendment originated and the motion there is that that house recede or refuse to recede from its position in adopting the amendment(s). If there is a refusal to recede, it then becomes necessary to appoint conference committees, consisting usually of at least three members of each house, to meet and attempt to reconcile the differences between the two houses on the bill or to recommend a course of action agreeable to both houses.

[bubbiesdad]

My guy, a Dem. voted in favor of freedom. He also got an A from the NRA in the last election.

[Guest bkelm18]

My guy, a Dem. voted in favor of freedom. He also got an A from the NRA in the last election.

I just finished writing a thank you email to Mr. Hackworth.

[Guest JavaGuy]

I don't think they could kill the whole bill. Only vote as whether to concur or not concur with any changes made to the bill in the senate.

The bill has to pass both chambers in the same form. If the Senate amends the language from the bill's current form, the bill will return to the House with the Senate's changes in it.

The House can then vote to accept the changes or refuse to accept them. If the House does not accept the changes and the Senate does not rescind the changes, the bill generally will go to a conference committee. Each speaker will appoint a small group of members to this ad-hoc committee with the mission of trying to find a compromise on the language of the bill.

If an agreement is reached in the committee, the House and Senate will each be asked to accept the version of the bill hammered out in conference. If both chambers accept the language, the bill will be signed by the respective speakers and sent to the governor for his signature.

When a bill reaches the governor, he has ten days (excluding Sundays) to sign the bill or veto it. If he does not sign or veto within that ten days, the bill will pass into law without his signature.

Oh, one further thing.. someone had asked earlier what it meant to "table an amendment." The sponsor of an amendment will "move to adopt" the amendment. The opponents of an amendment will "move the amendment to the table" or move "to table the amendment." Either statement means the same thing - they are asking their fellow members to vote against the amendment..

[TripleDigitRide]

Wasn't there an amendment that would prevent HCP holders from carrying into an establishment with an age restriction? If so, was that tabled, too?

[Guest bkelm18]

Wasn't there an amendment that would prevent HCP holders from carrying into an establishment with an age restriction? If so, was that tabled, too?

That was not an amendment. I believe it was part of the original bill submitted by Rep. Todd.

[Smith]

The bill has to pass both chambers in the same form. If the Senate amends the language from the bill's current form, the bill will return to the House with the Senate's changes in it.

The House can then vote to accept the changes or refuse to accept them. If the House does not accept the changes and the Senate does not rescind the changes, the bill generally will go to a conference committee. Each speaker will appoint a small group of members to this ad-hoc committee with the mission of trying to find a compromise on the language of the bill.

If an agreement is reached in the committee, the House and Senate will each be asked to accept the version of the bill hammered out in conference. If both chambers accept the language, the bill will be signed by the respective speakers and sent to the governor for his signature.

When a bill reaches the governor, he has ten days (excluding Sundays) to sign the bill or veto it. If he does not sign or veto within that ten days, the bill will pass into law without his signature.

Oh, one further thing.. someone had asked earlier what it meant to "table an amendment." The sponsor of an amendment will "move to adopt" the amendment. The opponents of an amendment will "move the amendment to the table" or move "to table the amendment." Either statement means the same thing - they are asking their fellow members to vote against the amendment..

Very helpful, Thank you. I watch the sessions and all the "table the amendment" "rolling it to the hill" etc can get a little confusing. I don't always know if I'm supporting or rejecting!

[Fallguy]

The bill has to pass both chambers in the same form. If the Senate amends the language from the bill's current form, the bill will return to the House with the Senate's changes in it.

The House can then vote to accept the changes or refuse to accept them. If the House does not accept the changes and the Senate does not rescind the changes, the bill generally will go to a conference committee. Each speaker will appoint a small group of members to this ad-hoc committee with the mission of trying to find a compromise on the language of the bill.

If an agreement is reached in the committee, the House and Senate will each be asked to accept the version of the bill hammered out in conference. If both chambers accept the language, the bill will be signed by the respective speakers and sent to the governor for his signature.

I believe that is what I posted from the state's website.

Which means the house, including Nafieh, wouldn't get a change to vote the whole bill down again (what the person I quoted was worried about) but only any changes made.

[waynesan]

The Senate Judiciary Committee will be meeting today 4/8/09 at 3:00 to vote on SB1127 (Restaurant Carry where alcohol is served).

22. SB 1127 by *Jackson, Norris (*HB 0962 by *Todd, McCord, Tindell, Evans, Fincher, Watson, Faulkner, Eldridge, Rowland, McCormick, Bass, Hackworth, Cobb C, Carr, Matheny, Mumpower, Floyd, Bell, Lollar, Casada, Rich, Lynn, Harrison, Shipley, Dean, Johnson C, Johnson P, Niceley, Tidwell, Shepard, Hill, Ramsey, Halford, Haynes, Swafford, Maggart, Hensley, West, Montgomery, Dennis, Brooks H, Matlock, Dunn, Hawk, Lundberg, Weaver, Roach, Ford , Moore)

Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, allows person with handgun carry permit to carry in restaurants that serve alcoholic beverages as long as such person is not consuming alcoholic beverages and such restaurant is not an age-restricted venue. -

[Guest MediaBuster]

I spoke to Rep Todd's assistant yesterday. Even if the curfew stays in place, as a patron, you don't have to get up & leave at 11pm as many of us feared. It is rather that you are prohibited from entering the establishment after that time of 11pm with a firearm. If you work there, you are fine. If you were already there before 11pm, you'd be fine as well.

Looks like I for one didn't give them enough credit for thinking it through.. I'd rather not have any curfew, but it isn't nearly as bad as I thought.

Rep. Todd has done a very good job here, & I let them know that when I spoke to them.

[Guest HexHead]

That was not an amendment. I believe it was part of the original bill submitted by Rep. Todd.

The thinking was that if it was age restricted, Age 21 and up, that it was a "bar" and not a restaurant. That will keep us out of nightclubs when carrying.

[Fallguy]

I spoke to Rep Todd's assistant yesterday. Even if the curfew stays in place, as a patron, you don't have to get up & leave at 11pm as many of us feared. It is rather that you are prohibited from entering the establishment after that time of 11pm with a firearm. If you work there, you are fine. If you were already there before 11pm, you'd be fine as well.

Looks like I for one didn't give them enough credit for thinking it through.. I'd rather not have any curfew, but it isn't nearly as bad as I thought.

Rep. Todd has done a very good job here, & I let them know that when I spoke to them.

Hmmm....it may not be the intent of the sponsor of the bill or theAmendment for you to have to get up and leave before 11:00, but the wording of it sure makes it appear that once 11:00pm arrives it is illegal to have a handgun regardless of what time you came in.

[Volzfan]

Hmmm....it may not be the intent of the sponsor of the bill or theAmendment for you to have to get up and leave before 11:00, but the wording of it sure makes it appear that once 11:00pm arrives it is illegal to have a handgun regardless of what time you came in.

Most anything that is open for interpretation is a potential problem.

[Guest MediaBuster]

Hmmm....it may not be the intent of the sponsor of the bill or theAmendment for you to have to get up and leave before 11:00, but the wording of it sure makes it appear that once 11:00pm arrives it is illegal to have a handgun regardless of what time you came in.

I can only tell you what she told me.. I made sure it was clear what I was asking her to clarify. She said once you're in the establishment, you're fine unless you leave. Perhaps it is because there's more language that is to be added, & we're only seeing a summary. Not sure..

[Fallguy]

I can only tell you what she told me.. I made sure it was clear what I was asking her to clarify. She said once you're in the establishment, you're fine unless you leave. Perhaps it is because there's more language that is to be added, & we're only seeing a summary. Not sure..

I don't doubt that is what she told you. I'm just not sure she is right...lol

What else is to be added? It has already passed out of the house. AFAIK the link to the amendment I posted is the exact version that passed.

[eapking]

A gun check at the bar! Well there won't be any accidents there I'm sure. Idiots.

[Guest MediaBuster]

I don't doubt that is what she told you. I'm just not sure she is right...lol

What else is to be added? It has already passed out of the house. AFAIK the link to the amendment I posted is the exact version that passed.

No, I hear ya man.. It's hard to say. I'm sure she has a zillion things to keep up with. I did see on the NRA News today with Cam that NRA lawyers are asking for the curfew to be removed.. I guess we'll have to wait & see..

[Guest JavaGuy]

I believe that is what I posted from the state's website.

Which means the house, including Nafieh, wouldn't get a change to vote the whole bill down again (what the person I quoted was worried about) but only any changes made.

Yeppie.. However, if the Senate passes version A, the House passes version B, and they don't reconcile the differences into a single version.. then it all falls by the wayside.

When the Senate bill hits the floor, they will substitute the House bill (since it has already passed the House and is waiting on the Senate desk) with its current language. The Senate will then begin working on the House bill (the technical term is "substitute and conform") by placing the Senate's amendments onto the House bill to determine the form that they will pass it in.

If the language is changed, it would return to the House for a vote. And if both chambers refuse to accept the other's language in the bill, it will then go to a conference committee.

[Guest JavaGuy]

Very helpful, Thank you. I watch the sessions and all the "table the amendment" "rolling it to the hill" etc can get a little confusing. I don't always know if I'm supporting or rejecting!

That's "roll it to the heel." i.e. put it at the bottom of the amendments or at the bottom of the calendar if they are discussing a bill.

[Fallguy]

Yeppie.. However, if the Senate passes version A, the House passes version B, and they don't reconcile the differences into a single version.. then it all falls by the wayside.

True...but I think the odds of that are fairly slim (at least I hope) since both chambers seem to want the same basic thing and may simply disagree on specifics.

I'm hoping that even though the House didn't want to remove the restrictions themselves...they are willing to accept it if the Senate does. But we'll see I guess. lol

[cadillacdude1975]

so get there at 10:50PM and stay till teh damned place closes. that garbage is so stupid.

[Guest m&pc9]

Does anyone know a time frame or a guess. If everything goes well when this would be a law.