Governor's words, actions differ on right to keep or bear arms

[Guest Phantom6]

A friend of mine fired this letter off to the governor in response to the Governor's mass emailing in which he claimed to be 2nd Amendment and Tennessee Constitution friendly. He also sent a copy to our local paper and they printed it. I believe he has just called a spade a spade and a Tennessee Democratic Party leader an anti-gun, anti-citizen-rights, two-faced, double talking rogue.

I wish I'd have thought of it!

Here, I thought I'd share:

Governor's words, actions differ on right to keep or bear arms

Letter to the Editor

Submitted

Posted Jun 10, 2009 @ 09:00 AM

OAK RIDGE, Tenn. —

Governor's words, actions differ on right to keep or bear arms

To the Editor:

(The following letter was e-mailed to Gov. Phil Bredesen and state legislators, as well as The Oak Ridger.)

Dear Governor Bredesen:

I was one of the many citizens that received your e-mail regarding the right to keep and bear arms. Based upon your actions and statements to the press I find it very hard to believe you believe in the right to keep or bear arms. While our state constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, the laws passed by the legislature tell a very different tale.

First, last year when the legislature tried to remove your "emergency" power to come into citizens' homes and commandeer their firearms, ammunition, and ammunition and firearms components, you had that removed from the bill before you would approve it. In that what constitutes an "emergency" is completely up to you, and because those powers may be delegated, you have maintained the power to send subordinates into our homes at will and disarm us. This tells me you do not believe it is a right of the citizens of Tennessee to keep arms -- even in their homes. This seems contrary to recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings (Heller vs D.C.)... and the words in your letter.

Second, while you say you support the right to bear arms, as the state's chief executive you support the fact that bearing of arms in Tennessee is strictly regulated and for the most part prohibited. Tennessee law distinguishes between "bearing" arms and the "wearing" of arms.

"Bearing" arms is limited to transporting or carrying unloaded firearms with no ammunition readily available -- unless you are engaged in state-permitted hunting, which allows that specific weapon, or if you are taking part in an authorized shooting event (also normally state-licensed).

The "wearing" of arms is regulated by the legislature "with a view to prevent crime." The "wearing" of arms is simply having a functional firearm with you in public when not engaged in state-authorized hunting or shooting sports. The state issues handgun carry permits to individuals with very clean backgrounds after finger-printing and background checks and training and fees -- but those well vetted individuals are still not allowed to have functional firearms with them in many places including all parks, any property that is owned by a school or college, wildlife management areas, ... the list is far too long for this e-mail.

Rights are only supposed to be limited or restricted by government when it has a compelling public interest. Rights are not normally licensed or subject to payment for their exercise. The wearing of arms in Tennessee is only supposed to be regulated "with a view to prevent crime." The Tennessee courts have said that that means the restriction can be reasonably expected to reduce/prevent crime. I believe the handgun carry permit system has proven that careful screening does ensure that those authorized to carry handguns in public are safe and law abiding and is therefore a reasonable and Constitutional restriction.

However, most of the laws in TCA 39-17-13XX restrict the right of those with carry permits, and give special privileges to a long list of folks authorized to carry most places. TCA 39-17-1359 (the posting law) is a good example -- it started out applying to most everyone except police officers and military personnel "while in the performance of their official duties" -- within a few years it only applied to permit holders and no one else.

You have every right to your opinions on the right to keep and bear arms. But you have sworn to support and defend the Constitution of the U.S. and the state of Tennessee. Laws prohibiting the wearing of arms without a state-issued permit is a very significant limitation of that right. Imagine if a law was passed and required a state-issued permit to vote -- and required a large fee or poll tax, and passing a class and written exam? It would be struck down immediately. And it should -- people should not have to prove their proficiency, have to pay, or prove a need to vote -- it is a right.

Permit holders in Tennessee and across the nation have been patient. They have proven that they are safe and law abiding. The state's "compelling need" to restrict them from public venues in order to "prevent crime" can simply no longer be supported. Those restrictions are therefore no longer Constitutional and you should not be supporting them. In that every vote against these rights in most of the important bills this year have been cast by members of the Tennessee Democratic Party you have ensured that the Tennessee Democratic Party will be easily shown to be anti-gun, anti-citizen-rights, and in violation of their oaths of office.

Steven J. Mead

Oak Ridge

Here is the link to the Oak Ridger in case anyone wishes to check the story-

http://www.oakridger.com/opinions/x124622634/Governors-words-actions-differ-on-right-to-keep-or-bear-arms

[Guest SUNTZU]

GREAT letter!

[Guest HexHead]

Yep, great letter. Somehow I doubt Phil will even see it, much less read it.

[Guest Phantom6]

Yep, great letter. Somehow I doubt Phil will even see it, much less read it.

If it came from someone else you would probably be correct. Steve and I served together on the Anderson County Republican Committee. In fact he is most recently past president of the ACRC. I have no doubt that his email and/or this open letter will be seen or at the very least it's content relayed to the Gov.

[Guest HexHead]

If it came from someone else you would probably be correct. Steve and I served together on the Anderson County Republican Committee. In fact he is most recently past president of the ACRC. I have no doubt that his email and/or this open letter will be seen or at the very least it's content relayed to the Gov.

Maybe if it came from the Anderson County Democrat Committee? I don't think he cares what we think anymore. He's drank the Obama .