Apartments & Guns

[Guest Patty]

Flag on the play. 10 posts, no credibility. Penalty, defense gets the ball.

I must also add that 5 out of 10 posts (including the first post) from Patty have been inflammatory shall we say?

Patty, if you would kindly show us the TCA code you refer too. Please also keep in mind you are on a board with people who work in the firearms training industry, lawyers, police officers, and other individuals who can quote TCA in their sleep. *coughFallguycough*

There has not been any attempt on my part to flame anything. I have made a effort to help answer the first posters question or concern. If someone else choose's to imply that my comments are incorrect, wrong in their opinion, and then ask for me to prove them wrong. I have not any intentions of doing so. So if you think that anybody who has CHP and is renting, and the lease agreement states within it that firearms or hangguns are not allowed, and is signed, then the requirement of posting has been met for that person, and only that person. And at anytime said person decides to not follow that agreement, and is caught breaking that agreement, that person is subject to the Tennessee Codes that was broken. And we can quote all we want to in our sleep, but it is the Judge who will decide, and we can then continue to quote all we want still, while we decide if we want to appeal.

[Oh Shoot]

...anybody who has CHP,,,but it is the Judge who will decide, and we can then continue to quote all we want still, while we decide if we want to appeal.

Again, who is going to notify this "judge"?

Who is going to lodge a charge of carrying in a posted area?

And also, since you are such a legal scholar, be advised that in TN there is no such thing as a CHP.

- OS

[Punisher84]

There has not been any attempt on my part to flame anything. I have made a effort to help answer the first posters question or concern. If someone else choose's to imply that my comments are incorrect, wrong in their opinion, and then ask for me to prove them wrong. I have not any intentions of doing so. So if you think that anybody who has CHP and is renting, and the lease agreement states within it that firearms or hangguns are not allowed, and is signed, then the requirement of posting has been met for that person, and only that person. And at anytime said person decides to not follow that agreement, and is caught breaking that agreement, that person is subject to the Tennessee Codes that was broken. And we can quote all we want to in our sleep, but it is the Judge who will decide, and we can then continue to quote all we want still, while we decide if we want to appeal.

I don't know where you are getting your information, but all I can tell is you that you are wrong.

There is a huge difference between civil law (breaking a contract) and criminal law (breaking a law set forth by the state).

What we are all boggling about is that we are simply asking for you to post a link to what you are referring to in the TCA, but you refuse and are being evasive about it so that leads me to believe you are simply going by a personal opinion or something you've been told and don't actually have any evidence what-so-ever to support your claim.

[Fallguy]

If they signed a lease that says no firearms and they have a firearm. They did violate the terms of the lease. (Which is a civil, not criminal matter) They can be evicted. However they did not break any criminal law. Of course we're still not sure which law you think they have broke since you have not said yourself or confirmed when I or others have asked if you mean 39-17-1359.

[Guest clownsdd]

OK, I got tired of reading this stuff.

Very Simple

What part of terms and conditions of a lease (a binding contract) is hard to understand?

It is the lessor's right to word the contract any way they want to, as well as the lessee's right to disagree and negotiate the terms.

The landlord says no and you sign the lease, you are breaking that contract if you have a gun.

Again, how hard is that? JMHO

[Guest Patty]

Again, who is going to notify this "judge"?

Who is going to lodge a charge of carrying in a posted area?

And also, since you are such a legal scholar, be advised that in TN there is no such thing as a CHP.

- OS

I know what you meant, and I know you know what I meant too. So carry concealed without one, and see which code you can defend yourself with. Or just leave your permit at home. But your correction on my error is a flame, lol.

[Guest Patty]

OK, I got tired of reading this stuff.

Very Simple

What part of terms and conditions of a lease (a binding contract) is hard to understand?

It is the lessor's right to word the contract any way they want to, as well as the lessee's right to disagree and negotiate the terms.

The landlord says no and you sign the lease, you are breaking that contract if you have a gun.

Again, how hard is that? JMHO

Pretty simple, no codes needed for me to understand, and respect.

[Punisher84]

Allright I'm calling troll.

[Fallguy]

OK, I got tired of reading this stuff.

Very Simple

What part of terms and conditions of a lease (a binding contract) is hard to understand?

It is the lessor's right to word the contract any way they want to, as well as the lessee's right to disagree and negotiate the terms.

The landlord says no and you sign the lease, you are breaking that contract if you have a gun.

Again, how hard is that? JMHO

Correct.

But you are not breaking a law.

[Guest bkelm18]

Allright I'm calling troll.

I 2nd that motion.

[Oh Shoot]

OK, I got tired of reading this stuff.

Very Simple

What part of terms and conditions of a lease (a binding contract) is hard to understand?

It is the lessor's right to word the contract any way they want to, as well as the lessee's right to disagree and negotiate the terms.

The landlord says no and you sign the lease, you are breaking that contract if you have a gun.

Again, how hard is that? JMHO

No one is denying that.

Since you obviously haven't noticed, the debate is whether a lease violation also constitutes a criminal act of a weapons statute.

(Against the statute regarding carrying in a posted establishment, I guess, or maybe some other criminal statute - it's kind of hard to pin Patty down on that).

- OS

[Fallguy]

I 2nd that motion.

All in favor....

AYE!!!

Motion carries.

Time for a cigar with and adult beverage and not worry about this anymore...

[Guest bkelm18]

All in favor....

AYE!!!

Motion carries.

Time for a cigar with and adult beverage and not worry about this anymore...

That sounds pretty damn good right about now.

[Punisher84]

All in favor....

AYE!!!

Motion carries.

Time for a cigar with and adult beverage and not worry about this anymore...

Mr. Speaker amendment is tabled. Proceeding on. Cigars are in the foyer...

[Guest Patty]

No one is denying that.

Since you obviously haven't noticed, the debate is whether a lease violation also constitutes a criminal act of a weapons statute.

(Against the statute regarding carrying in a posted establishment, I guess, or maybe some other criminal statute - it's kind of hard to pin Patty down on that).

- OS

NO, its not, I think I am pinned down, but not giving up. LOL, The TCA does address this.

[Guest illumina]

All we're asking is for you to prove it with something other than your word.

[Guest Patty]

All we're asking is for you to prove it with something other than your word.

It should be pretty easy to prove me wrong, prove that. But don't expect me to accept your word.

Edited April 23, 2009 by Patty

[Fallguy]

It should be pretty easy to prove me wrong, prove that.

Ok...the Jack is making me post one more time.

You are the one saying something is illegal.

If I say it is illegal to were a red shirt. No one can post a statute that says it is legal to were a red shirt. The only proof that it is legal is that there is no law against it.

So many of us have said we don't think it is a criminal violation because we can't find a law that says it is. YOU are the one that keeps saying that is illegal and you know the code that can prove it.

Don't know if you play poker or not...but your bluff has been called. Time to either show your cards or fold.

Edited April 23, 2009 by Fallguy

[Guest KWW67]

Patty, are you saying that a land lord insertion of weapons prohibition in the lease is the same as the property being posted by a property owner? And the possessor could be charged in the same manner as carrying in a posted place? I can understand the argument if it were worded the proper way, but it would still have to be posted on the actual property per the TCA, right guys? Or am I missing something? To be fair to all, I could see how this could get twisted. As OP stated, I see no violation of posted carry. But if other conditions were present, maybe, i.e posted on site. I am like ohshoot, she is not being specific. So speculation could go on for days............

Edited April 23, 2009 by KWW67
spelling

[Guest KWW67]

Deleted by kww67. See below post.

Edited April 23, 2009 by KWW67

[Guest KWW67]

Handgun Carry Permit T.C.A. Codes

Department of Safety

Dave Mitchell, Commissioner

Handgun Carry Permit Related Laws

Handgun Carry Permit T.C.A. Codes T.C.A. NumberCode Subject

39-17-1302Prohibited weapons

39-17-1305Possession of firearms where alcoholic beverages are served and consumed

39-17-1306Carrying weapons during judicial proceedings

39-17-1307Unlawful carrying or possession of a weapon

39-17-1309Carrying weapons on school property

39-17-1311Carrying weapons on public parks, playgrounds, civic centers, and other recreational building and grounds

39-17-1315( (1): Written directive and permit to carry handguns

39-17-1320Providing handguns to juveniles

39-17-1321Possession of a handgun while under the influence

39-17-1322Defenses

39-17-1351 - 1358Handgun Carry Permits

Note: Since the link references several T.C.A. Numbers, an index page containing the links 1351 - 1358 will appear when selected.

39-17-1359Prohibitions at certain meetings

39-17-1360Rules and regulations

Title 62 Chapter 35Private protective services

Title 70 Chapter 4Miscellaneous regulations

70-4-103Fox hunting - Training of hunting dogs - Penalty

70-4-112Hunting and chasing coons regulated - Training season - Violations, penalties

70-4-117Possession of weapons in areas inhabited by big game - Penalty

• For Residents
  
• For Visitors
  
• For Business
  

• Department of Safety
  
• 1150 Foster Avenue
  
• Nashville, TN 37243
  
• (615) 251-5166
  
• Email.Safety@tn.gov
  

Edited April 23, 2009 by KWW67

[Guest KWW67]

Are you talking about 39-17-1315 ((2) ???

39-17-1315. Written directive and permit to carry handguns. —

(a) (1) Any law enforcement officer, police officer, bonded and sworn deputy sheriff, director, commissioner, county magistrate or retired law enforcement officer who is bonded and who, at the time of receiving the written directive, has successfully completed and, except for a law enforcement officer who has retired in good standing as certified by the chief law enforcement officer of the organization from which the officer retired, continues to successfully complete on an annual basis a firearm training program of at least eight (8) hours duration, director or full-time employee of the Tennessee emergency management agency in the performance of the director's or employee's duty, any duly authorized representative or full-time employee of the board of probation and parole who has been specifically designated by the board to execute warrants issued pursuant to § 40-28-121 or § 40-35-311 or to perform such other duties as specifically designated by the board, or any other officer or person authorized to carry handguns by this, or any other law of this state, may carry handguns at all times pursuant to a written directive by the executive supervisor of the organization to which the person is or was attached or employed, regardless of the person's regular duty hours or assignments; however, a copy of the written directive shall be retained as a portion of the records of the particular law enforcement agency that shall issue the directive. Nothing in this subdivision (a)(1) shall prevent federal officers from carrying firearms as prescribed by federal law.

(2) Any duly elected and sworn constable in any county having a population of not less than eleven thousand one hundred (11,100) nor more than eleven thousand two hundred (11,200), according to the 1970 federal census or any subsequent federal census, and being a county in which constables retain law enforcement powers and duties under the provisions of §§ 8-10-108, 40-6-210, 55-8-152, 57-5-202 and 57-9-101, are authorized to and may carry handguns at all times and may equip their vehicles with blue and red lights and sirens. The sheriff of such county shall issue a written directive or permit authorizing the constables to carry a handgun; provided, that each constable has completed the same eight-hour annual firearm training program as is required by this subsection (a).

(3) The county commission may, by a two-thirds (2/3) vote, require the constable to have in effect a liability policy or a corporate surety bond in an amount of not less than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000).

( (1) An individual, corporation or business entity is authorized to prohibit the possession of weapons by employees otherwise authorized by this subsection ( on premises owned, operated or managed by the individual, corporation or business entity. Notice of the prohibition shall be posted or otherwise noticed to all affected employees.

(2) An individual, corporation, business entity or governmental entity or agent thereof is authorized to prohibit possession of weapons by any person otherwise authorized by this subsection (, at meetings conducted by, or on premises owned, operated, managed or under control of the individual, corporation, business entity or governmental entity. Notice of the prohibition shall be posted or announced.

[Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1; 1990, ch. 1029, § 10; 1993, ch. 471, §§ 2, 4; 1994, ch. 943, §§ 2-9, 11-13; 1995, ch. 434, § 1; 1996, ch. 905, § 1; 1999, ch. 498, § 1; 2003, ch. 144, § 1; 2007, ch. 318, § 1; 2007, ch. 586, § 3.]

Edited April 23, 2009 by KWW67

[Punisher84]

How about 39-17-1315 ((2)

That specifically pertains to meetings. Look closely at the wording.

Edited April 23, 2009 by Punisher84

[Fallguy]

That only covers weapons carried under a written directive issued under 39-17-1315 not HCPs issued under 39-17-1351

[Guest KWW67]

OK. Thanks. I have looked about everything I know. I dunno where it is coming from.......