HB0962 - Restaurant Carry

[Fallguy]

Btw, I wasnt trying to be argumentative earlier.. but I was told they were adding stuff to keep the bars clear. I assumed it was an age restriction.

Wasn't that what the curfew and age restriction parts were trying to do?

Also as we've siad you can only carry in what is defined as a restaurant. However I will admit even with that wording, there is still room for interpretation. See the two places I mentioned in my previous post. I wouldn't agree with it, but one could make the argument that serving meals is not the principal business conducted in either place.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

Wasn't that what the curfew and age restriction parts were trying to do?

Also as we've siad you can only carry in what is defined as a restaurant. However I will admit even with that wording, there is still room for interpretation. See the two places I mentioned in my previous post. I wouldn't agree with it, but one could make the argument that serving meals is not the principal business conducted in either place.

yea they got what they wanted, that was too keep the guns out of "bars"... the other issue that was part of the "age restriction" was the strip clubs. They really didnt want folks carrying in there either.

[Guest db99wj]

yea they got what they wanted, that was too keep the guns out of "bars"... the other issue that was part of the "age restriction" was the strip clubs. They really didnt want folks carrying in there either.

There's already enough of.....nevermind.

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

so, just to clarify - this bill does still have to get a final vote in the Senate before heading to Bredesen's desk right? did that get covered and I missed it maybe? If so, I apologize.

[Guest djack41]

Tennessee has no license for "Bars". All "Bars" are licensed as restaurants. The bill essentially uses the definition of restaurant that has been in state law for years. For practical purposes, there are no "bar" restrictions in this bill.

[Guest Runnfree]

Yes the Senate has to still vote on this. They should passed it fine because it is the way they had it setup in the first place.

[Guest db99wj]

so, just to clarify - this bill does still have to get a final vote in the Senate before heading to Bredesen's desk right? did that get covered and I missed it maybe? If so, I apologize.

It goes back to the Senate, in the same form that they voted and approved, they vote again, send it on to the Gov.

Tennessee has no license for "Bars". All "Bars" are licensed as restaurants. The bill essentially uses the definition of restaurant that has been in state law for years. For practical purposes, there are no "bar" restrictions in this bill.

Interesting.

[bubbiesdad]

Tennessee has no license for "Bars". All "Bars" are licensed as restaurants. The bill essentially uses the definition of restaurant that has been in state law for years. For practical purposes, there are no "bar" restrictions in this bill.

Somebody needs to tell the media this. They are all screaming about "GUNS IN BARS"

[Guest nraforlife]

I will have no problem going to a Copper Cellar Corp restaurant. I don't really care if he puts up a no guns sign. As long as the sign does not meet the legal requirement it means nothing.

A half expect there to be signs with circle and slash. That is for soccer moms and nilly willys to have peace of mind, not to keep us out.

Just be smart and don't OC there

[Guest SomeGuy]

Somebody needs to tell the media this. They are all screaming about "GUNS IN BARS"

I would wager they know, but do not care.

I read the paper today, saw a little blurb from the AP. It reminds me of an old (new?) saying:

"What you read in the papers is true, unless you know the facts."

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

Somebody needs to tell the media this. They are all screaming about "GUNS IN BARS"

The media already knows, they just don't care. Telling this story with the actual facts doesn't make for that interesting of a story - not enough sensationalism to say "Pretty soon, Bob here will be able to eat at O'Charleys while being responsible for his own safety".

[Fallguy]

yea they got what they wanted, that was too keep the guns out of "bars"... the other issue that was part of the "age restriction" was the strip clubs. They really didnt want folks carrying in there either.

I hear ya

It seems the way it ended up it will still prevent carry in stripclubs and bars, if serving alcohol is pretty much all they do (even though there isn't a definition of them in TN)

However even with the restaurant defintion...it is going to allow carry in some places that some people may not call a restaurant.

[Guest Khitan]

I notice when I go into the Paradiso they have a seperate are that would be a 'bar'. The place you go into to order and drink your alcohol or beer. You cant leave that area with your drink and it is restricted to minors.

It always appeared to me that this would mean the theater itself would be legal carry even under current law. Just like when I go to the mall and they have a Ruby Tuesdays there serving drinks.

I dont claim to be a law expert, can anyone help me understand better?

[Punisher84]

Unless I'm just misunderstanding this, wouldn't the lifting of these restrictions mean we can carry in ANY place that serves alcohol as long as they don't post the location??

I never read where there was a provision for food/alcohol sales percentages or anything.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

I still dont think you are going to be able to carry in a place that sells alcohol thats not a business thats primary reason for being is to serve food... meaning a "bar"... I mean its too grey for me, or maybe Im looking at it too hard.

I honestly think what we need is when John Harris has time to step in and chime in on what we have when its all said and done. He's probably the only one that can sift through all this correctly.

[Punisher84]

I still dont think you are going to be able to carry in a place that sells alchohol thats not a buisness thats primary reason for being is to serve food... meaning a "bar"... I mean its too grey for me, or maybe Im looking at it too hard.

I honestly think what we need is when John Harris has time to step in and chime in on what we have when its all said and done. He's probably the only one that can sift through all this correctly.

I didn't figure we would and that's really OK with me, because if I'm in a bar, I'm drinking.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

rarely as I would be I would be too....

[Fallguy]

Unless I'm just misunderstanding this, wouldn't the lifting of these restrictions mean we can carry in ANY place that serves alcohol as long as they don't post the location??

I never read where there was a provision for food/alcohol sales percentages or anything.

I'm afraid you are misunderstanding.

When we are talking about the "restrictions" we were talking about the restrictions in the House bill (curfew and age-restriction) not the restrictions in the current law of 39-17-1305

This bill leaves all the restrictions in 39-17-1305 in place, it simply adds and exception for HCP holders within a restaurant as defined in the bill to the list of those already exempt.

• On Duty LEOs
  
• Armed Forces personnel in their official capacity
  
• The owner and his agents responsible for protection.
  

[Punisher84]

I'm afraid you are misunderstanding.

When we are talking about the "restrictions" we were talking about the restrictions in the House bill (curfew and age-restriction) not the restrictions in the current law of 39-17-1305

This bill leaves all the restrictions in 39-17-1305 in place, it simply adds and exception for HCP holders within a restaurant as defined in the bill to the list of those already exempt.

• On Duty LEOs
  
• Armed Forces personnel in their official capacity
  
• The owner and his agents responsible for protection.
  

Ok I think I gotcha know. Long day brother.

[Fallguy]

I still dont think you are going to be able to carry in a place that sells alcohol thats not a business thats primary reason for being is to serve food... meaning a "bar"... I mean its too grey for me, or maybe Im looking at it too hard.

I honestly think what we need is when John Harris has time to step in and chime in on what we have when its all said and done. He's probably the only one that can sift through all this correctly.

The only real gray area I see is...What does "and the serving of such meals shall be the principal business conducted" mean. It doesn't really define that term anywhere.

I think pretty much any national chain will meet that requirement though and there shouldn't be any problem there.

The doubt could come in a local place that happens to serve liquor and has a restaurant license but also have dancing, pool and other activities. One could make an argument that "serving meals" is not there primary purpose, but that they just happen to serve meals. ...and in fact those that don't like this bill may very will use that part of the code to prosecute some.

This is sort of reminding me of the current 39-17-1311 that prohibits "restricted weapons" in parks...on the surface it wouldn't seem to prevent handguns, but the AG says it does...and in the end a judge would probably decide. So probably the same thing here... carry in

412 Grill, Parsons, Tn. and Road Hawg Saloon - Dyersburg Tn - BIKES-BABES-BEER and the judge may be the one that decides if their primary purpose is to serve meals.

[Fallguy]

Ok I think I gotcha know. Long day brother.

True that

[Fallguy]

I'd like you to read this thread http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/political-issues/21011-story-hb0962-i-see.html and hear your thoughts.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

you would die if I merged the threads wouldnt ya... hehehehe

[Fallguy]

Well I could un-merge them....but I'd rather you didn't.

I think it is two separate things entirely......and I am just curious if others saw the process...at least to this point the same way I did

[GLOCKMEISTER]

I was just messin with ya...

I think most people see it the same or think there is no restrictions... and until John has time to look at the fine print we may not know for a while.