Okay, this is troubling....

[redstategunnut]

Nobody is responsible for protecting you against outside aggression. Not even the police! No business is required to provide security personnel to guard customers. The only way the owner could be sued is if he or one of his employees shot you in his establishment during business hours.

When you walk out of your house you are the only agency responsible for your safety. you have to make the personal decisions that will maximize your own security. If an establishment does not allow you your weapon, you must exercise your right to not enter that place.

I carry, but there are places I would like to go, but I don't go because of weapons restrictions.

I am pretty certain that I will still put my Centennial in the car safe when I go to Chilis, simply because I like a beer with my food and you still cannot drink while carrying.

Wrong on premises liability, and wrong to carry, drink, then carry again. Please don't do stupid stuff that jeopardizes what so many people have worked so hard to gain for us.

[Guest sstouder]

steelharp: you can download what is called a pdf restrictions remover. you can usually get a trial version for free and use it and then just delete the program if you dont want to purchase one. I have one cause im a graphic designer and need it when customers send me locked pdfs of stuff they want edited.

[JayC]

Guys, I spoke with Charlie Tygard this afternoon, they are serious about this ordinance, and are trying to force business to post in order to have a beer permit... Best not to wait until after they have proposed the ordinance but to go ahead and get in touch with the Metro Council now not later...

FYI, here is the link to the list of Nashville Council Members, included are phone numbers and email addresses. If you live inside Davidson County you should at least email and/or call all the at large members and any members who cover areas where you live, work, and dine out. Although comments to all wouldn't hurt either.

Nashville.gov - Metro Council - Council Roster

[wjh2657]

Wrong on premises liability, and wrong to carry, drink, then carry again. Please don't do stupid stuff that jeopardizes what so many people have worked so hard to gain for us.

Gun stays in safe until I get home. The Chilis is near home, so I am not unarmed all that long. I know and obey the law. But I am curious that someone on the forum finds this disturbing when most of the forum seems to believe that they should be able to carry openly into bars, where they almost invariably imbibe. I have been drinking for 48 years and I well know that drinkers with alcohol present are going to drink. Disobeying blatantly is "expressing your 2d A rights" while a possible indiscretion (not in my case!) is a horrible violation of the law. I think we need to get some balance here! Guns and alcohol don't mix period , that is just common sense. Guns and drunks (not the carrier!) for sure don't mix. If I want to drink I know that I have surrendered my 2d A rights for right now, it is a conscious and personal choice. I don't blame politicians for it, it is a good sane rule.

Momma (a non-drinker) drives home by the way.

[Guest HexHead]

I dont see how anything the metro council can pass will get around this... If they do pass this I wont spend a freaking dime eating in Metro again.

TCA 39-17-1314. Local regulation of firearms and ammunition preempted by state regulation — Actions against firearms or ammunition manufacturers, trade associations or dealers. —

(a) No city, county, or metropolitan government shall occupy any part of the field of regulation of the transfer, ownership, possession or transportation of firearms, ammunition or components of firearms or combinations thereof; provided, that the provisions of this section shall be prospective only and shall not affect the validity of any ordinance or resolution lawfully enacted before April 8, 1986.

( The general assembly declares that the lawful design, marketing, manufacture and sale of firearms and ammunition to the public are not unreasonably dangerous activities and do not constitute a nuisance per se.

© (1) The authority to bring suit and right to recover against any firearms or ammunition manufacturer, trade association or dealer by or on behalf of any state entity, county, municipality or metropolitan government for damages, abatement or injunctive relief resulting from or relating to the lawful design, manufacture, marketing or sale of firearms or ammunition to the public shall be reserved exclusively to the state.

(2) Nothing in this subsection © shall be construed to prohibit a county, municipality, or metropolitan government from bringing an action against a firearms or ammunition manufacturer or dealer for breach of contract or warranty as to firearms or ammunition purchased by such county, municipality, or metropolitan government.

(3) Nothing in this subsection © shall preclude an individual from bringing a cause of action for breach of a written contract, breach of an express warranty, or for injuries resulting from defects in the materials or workmanship in the manufacture of the firearm.

(d) The provisions of subsections ( and © shall not apply in any litigation brought by an individual against a firearms or ammunition manufacturer, trade association or dealer.

I keep reading that but don't see where it would help our situation. Could you highlight the part you're referring to?

[dunndw]

I think it's this part:

a) No city, county, or metropolitan government shall occupy any part of the field of regulation of the transfer, ownership, possession or transportation of firearms, ammunition or components of firearms or combinations thereof; provided, that the provisions of this section shall be prospective only and shall not affect the validity of any ordinance or resolution lawfully enacted before April 8, 1986.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

I wish it said "carrying"....

[JayC]

I wish it said "carrying"....

Under the law it does... possession is the act of carrying a firearm under TN law currently. The real question for the courts will be whether the beer board is 1. part of a government covered by 39-17-1314, and 2. that them not granting beer permits based on requiring businesses to post is "any part of the field of regulation of the" possession.

The truth is they can pass it, get Beer Board to enforce it, and we get to spend the next X number of years fighting it in court via the NRA or some other gun group. Or get the legislature to pass a law that closes the "supposed" loop hole.

Another course would be to try and get a opinion letter from the AG stating that this would be a violation of 39-17-1314, but how likely that is who knows.

I have a meeting with my State Senator on Monday, I'm going to press him to introduce legislation to close this "supposed" loop hole. But it's likely that would take the better part of a year to work it's way through the legislature.

[Guest crotalus01]

Well, if I am carrying my gun anywhere other than my home, I am possessing AND transporting it correct? So would that not fall under part a?

[RinTN]

Well, if I am carrying my gun anywhere other than my home, I am possessing AND transporting it correct? So would that not fall under part a?

Their twisted logic seems to be that they aren't doing anything about *you*, the gun owner. Instead, they are regulating the *business*, which just so happens to have the exact same effect.

[JayC]

Their twisted logic seems to be that they aren't doing anything about *you*, the gun owner. Instead, they are regulating the *business*, which just so happens to have the exact same effect.

The only thing going for us is the fact that 39-17-1314 blocks any regulation relating to the possession of firearms after April 1st 1986... I'm not exactly sure how requiring businesses to ban is any different than banning out right from a legal stand point.

Now getting 39-17-1314 enforced in short order is the hard part, best bet is to put pressure on the Metro Council to not pass this ordinance to being with.

[Guest HexHead]

that the provisions of this section shall be prospective only and shall not affect the validity of any ordinance or resolution

lawfully enacted before April 8, 1986

.[/font][/size]

What about that before 1986 part?

[JayC]

What about that before 1986 part?

Well since we're talking about a new ordinance the 1986 date doesn't apply....

Trying to fight this after it passes would require a successful lawsuit, which may take many years to complete... Much better for us to put public pressure on the council members now before it passes, than play that game.

It appears to me that 39-17-1314 is on point but again it would take a lawsuit to get 39-17-1314 to be enforced. At least that is my understanding.

Second choice would be to get the TN Legislature to pass another law that completely closed this loop hole for good. But that would likely take the better part of a year.

[Guest HexHead]

Guys, I spoke with Charlie Tygard this afternoon, they are serious about this ordinance, and are trying to force business to post in order to have a beer permit... Best not to wait until after they have proposed the ordinance but to go ahead and get in touch with the Metro Council now not later...

FYI, here is the link to the list of Nashville Council Members, included are phone numbers and email addresses. If you live inside Davidson County you should at least email and/or call all the at large members and any members who cover areas where you live, work, and dine out. Although comments to all wouldn't hurt either.

Nashville.gov - Metro Council - Council Roster

Jay, I just forwarded your post to the NRA-ILA. I've been emailing back and forth with them this afternoon on this issue. Never too early to get the big guns out.

What did Tygard say about his supporting or not supporting this issue?

He's my Councilman too.

[JayC]

Jay, I just forwarded your post to the NRA-ILA. I've been emailing back and forth with them this afternoon on this issue. Never too early to get the big guns out.

What did Tygard say about his supporting or not supporting this issue?

He's my Councilman too.

Tygard is an at large council member so he covers the entire county, but he lives in Bellevue and use to be our district council member... Are you in the 35th District as well?

Tygard seemed to be in support of the measure and I believe he maybe the council member who will introduce this ordinance shortly (like in the next few days). He seemed to inndicate that before he knew I was pro-hb0962. Once I mentioned that fact he seemed to take middle of the road stance, but time will tell.

I asked to have a face to face meeting with him, and he seemed open to the idea, I'm waiting to hear back from him shortly on when he can meet. (Hopefully he won't blow me off like some of his email responses have so far). But, I suspect he is pretty much for the ordinance from speaking to him.

[Guest 270win]

Carry a snub if Nashville pulls this stunt. Conceal a small handgun well wherever you go and you won't have any problems with paying some ILLEGAL city ordinance fine. This looks like a lawsuit against Nashville waiting to happen when the first legal handgun carry permit person is charged for this.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

there wont be a fine against persons... they are simply not going to issue beer permits unless the owner agree to put up the proper signage.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

Tygard is an at large council member so he covers the entire county, but he lives in Bellevue and use to be our district council member... Are you in the 35th District as well?

Tygard seemed to be in support of the measure and I believe he maybe the council member who will introduce this ordinance shortly (like in the next few days). He seemed to inndicate that before he knew I was pro-hb0962. Once I mentioned that fact he seemed to take middle of the road stance, but time will tell.

I asked to have a face to face meeting with him, and he seemed open to the idea, I'm waiting to hear back from him shortly on when he can meet. (Hopefully he won't blow me off like some of his email responses have so far). But, I suspect he is pretty much for the ordinance from speaking to him.

explain all the issues...

The possibility of a lawsuit... with NRA backing... $$$$$

The loss of revenue to the merchants...

$$$$ going out of the county

The fact that 37 other states dont have an issue with this...

And the simple fact that the legislature will undo whatever they do.. and will be pissed that they have to do it.

He needs to realize this passed because its the "will of the people".... and him and Judge Dread are turning their backs on those people.

[Guest sstouder]

got this from robert duvall:

First of all thank you for writing. I will fight any effort put forth to

circumvent our Constitutional Rights.

I hope you do not mind, but I thought I would make you aware of the

following event, in case you would like to participate. Please read below

my name.

Sincerely,

Robert Duvall (the event is the friends of the nra thing happening later this month)

also got this from duane dominy:

Thank you for sharing! I find this proposed end-run around the new state law shameful. I assure you that I will do all that is within my power to defend our second amendment rights.

I would also encourage you to attend the upcoming Friends of the NRA banquet here in Nashville on June 13. You may get more information and tickets at the link below.

http://www.friendsofnra.org/Events.aspx?sid=44&sc=TN

Keep up the fight,

Duane Dominy

and lastly got this from Karen Bennett:

I am with you.

Thank you for your input.

Karen Bennett

Council District 8

[Volzfan]

I sent an email to Sen. Jackson about this Council crap and this was his reply

David

I can not yet give a definitive answer but I plan to discuss this with the attorney general in the morning. If there is a loop hole, I believe the General Assembly will quickly pass a bill to close it before we adjourn.

Doug

[Mr. Brooks]

I sent an email to Sen. Jackson about this Council crap and this was his reply

Beautiful response!

[Guest HexHead]

This is encouraging. From the Tennessean this morning...

The Metro beer board would have no authority to punish a drinker who carries a gun into an establishment that serves beer. Instead, it could punish only the restaurant or bar, said Gary M. Brown, the beer board's chairman.

"The difficulty is, how would you enforce that?" he said.

So they would still have to post, to prevent permit holders from carrying into their place. If the whole purpose of this is to prevent forcing the bar or restaurant from having to post so not to scare the tourists, well so much for that.

Edited June 5, 2009 by HexHead

[Guest Doc44]

Looks like they are trying to open a can.... of worms or whoop a$$ or both.

Doc44

[Guest HexHead]

got this from robert duvall:

I would also encourage you to attend the upcoming Friends of the NRA banquet here in Nashville on June 13. You may get more information and tickets at the link below.

I realize I'm being petty about this, but I just can't bring myself to get involved with the Friends of the NRA here in Nashville, as long as Buford Tune is a high profile supporter. I've never met the man, but everything I've ever heard about him just screams horse's ass.

[Guest stovepipe]

I realize I'm being petty about this, but I just can't bring myself to get involved with the Friends of the NRA here in Nashville, as long as Buford Tune is a high profile supporter. I've never met the man, but everything I've ever heard about him just screams horse's ass.

That is petty, and tacky. I think you need to at least meet the man and form your own opinion of him before you dis him in a public forum. - If you air your opinion in public, at all. Love him or hate him, he does a lot for our cause. Friends of the NRA is a very worth while organization and can use your support. - But, I digress...

Edited June 5, 2009 by stovepipe