Challenge "Guns-in-bars" Law: Nashville attorneys David Randolph Smith & Adam Dread

[wjh2657]

I don't think they are going to get anywhere. Law was well written and allowed them the option to post and keep us out by law.

[Wingshooter]

I don't think they are going to get anywhere. Law was well written and allowed them the option to post and keep us out by law.

I agree. I think it is a long shot.

[Guest Doc44]

Special interest groups should not be able to dictate the law of the land.

Doc44

[Guest HexHead]

Special interest groups should not be able to dictate the law of the land.

Doc44

Where's you been the last oh, decade or so? The ACLU has been pulling this for years.

[Guest Doc44]

Where's you been the last oh, decade or so? The ACLU has been pulling this for years.

Yeah, I know... Was just typing out an echo that keeps bouncing around in my head since May, 1969.

Doc44

[netmindr]

As you no doubt know, the Tennessee General Assembly recently passed a law allowing individuals with gun permits (about 225,000 state residents)

to eat (but not drink) while armed in any public restaurant or bar unless the establishment owner prominently posts a sign barring guns. The responsibility for monitoring who can legally enter and who cannot, who is armed and who is not, who can be served alcohol and who cannot, who needs police protection and who does not, rests entirely on the shoulders of the restaurant/bar owner.

Typical liberal opinion that mere citizens cannot be trusted to be responsible for their own actions. Our actions must be legislated for us because they obviously know what is best for us. I know I feel better that someone is watching out for me and keeps me from having to even think about making any decisions for myself.

While the rest of us were wringing our hands about these developments, one restaurateur, Randy Rayburn of the Sunset Grill in Nashville, decided to take action. Yesterday, in Metro Chancery Court, he initiated a legal proceeding that seeks an injunction to halt implementation of the law until its constitutionality can be tested.

Seems to me that the constitution is pretty clear on this already. Actually, if you read it literally, any laws against carrying in restaurants and parks are themselves unconstitutional. Essentially, according to Article 1, Declaration of Rights, Section 26 we have the 'right', not priviledge, to carry anywhere and can only be limited where it could increase and not prevent crime - which is pretty much nowhere.

That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and bear arms of their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.

Notice the "by law," statement which means that a judge cannot overrule the laws, meaning they cannot overturn it from the bench; assuming they stay within the limits of their job description of upholding the law, not writing it.

The pacifist liberal's agenda is always to take the power away from the people and give it to the BGs because the BGs are not really bad, they're just "misunderstood" and simply need our love and sympathy. In my opinion the liberals can go live the the "misunderstood" BGs and let us keep our guns to protect ourselves from both of them!

Edited July 5, 2009 by netmindr

[Guest HexHead]

Typical liberal opinion that mere citizens cannot be trusted to be responsible for their own actions. Our actions must be legislated for us because they obviously know what is best for us. I know I feel better that someone is watching out for me and keeps me from having to even think about making any decisions for myself.

But you'll notice they aren't monitoring how much someone drinks before going out to their car to drive home, because they're making money on that.

[wjh2657]

Rayburn is, without a doubt a Liberal and political. I doubt that for the rest of them it a political issue as much as they don't want to tell us to stay out and lose our money. They're betting that gun owners will follow the law and still come in and party. And enough probably will to make this a profitable stand. It isn't a political stance for most, it is simply a money thing!

[jughead]

first we had king jimmy blocking then the gov tried. now we have dread trying. something wrong with a picture where one person can stall or block what so many people seem to want.

[Smith]

first we had king jimmy blocking then the gov tried. now we have dread trying. something wrong with a picture where one person can stall or block what so many people seem to want.

The definition of liberal.

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

I agree. I think it is a long shot.

I think it is a long shot that they will get the law overturned. I do fear that it is more likely that they will succeed in getting an injunction that will hold up the July 14th date for some amount of time though. I hope not, but I could see the effective date being delayed a few weeks/months while they fight it out in court - you know, to test the "constitutionality" of the law.

[Guest HexHead]

Now these idiots are amending the lawsuit to say it's 'unconstitutionally vague"....

Restaurateur Randy Rayburn and a group of restaurant employees and handgun carry permit holders are arguing the new law is "unconstitutionally vague."

"It is a Class A misdemeanor for a permit holder to carry a gun into a place that serves alcohol that is not exempted as a restaurant," the amended lawsuit says. "Permit holders will have no notice or way to determine if an establishment is a restaurant or a bar (whether its primary purpose is serving meals) as there is no distinction by licensing laws or notice."

David Randolph Smith, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the state Alcoholic Beverage Commission sometimes fines establishments whose food sales drop below 50 percent, but it generally doesn't shut them down.

"How do you know?" Smith said. "Technically, that wouldn't be a restaurant under the carry law."

[Falcon1]

"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so.

But I know it when I see it...."--Justice Potter Stewart, Jacobellis v. Ohio

I would submit that most of us know a restaurant, as opposed to a bar, when we see it.

[VolunteerGuns]

Anyone know what time today this will be in front of a judge?

[Redec]

Anyone know what time today this will be in front of a judge?

It was rescheduled to 7/13 I believe.

[Guest HexHead]

It was rescheduled to 7/13 I believe.

It was at the request of the AG.

I guess newschannel5 didn't get the memo though. On this morning's broadcast, they said it was going to a judge today.

[Guest Doc44]

It was at the request of the AG.

I guess newschannel5 didn't get the memo though. On this morning's broadcast, they said it was going to a judge today.

Well, that's pretty good for newschannel5... they only missed it a few days...

Doc44

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

Interesting that the AG requested it get moved to the 13th, which is the day before the law goes into effect. I am trying very hard to suppress my desire to read anything into that.

[Guest Ravendove]

Well, I just finished reading a very lopsided article in Courthouse News. It's pretty obvious which side of the fence they're on.

Courthouse News Service

[Guest redbarron06]

Well, I just finished reading a very lopsided article in Courthouse News. It's pretty obvious which side of the fence they're on.

Courthouse News Service

big supprise

[Guest HexHead]

big supprise

No, this was the surprise...

NASHVILLE (CN) - A restaurateur and others who serve alcohol asked the Tennessee Attorney General to join them in opposing a proposed law that will expressly allow loaded guns in bars.

Especially considering he was named as the defendant in the lawsuit.

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

It will make Tennessee the first state to expressly allow people to carry a loaded, concealed gun into a bar,

The plaintiffs say 14 of those states prohibit loaded guns in bars and the other 24 states do not have laws that expressly permit or prohibit guns in bars.

They are trying to parse words and are contradicting their own argument. 24 States allow it already because they never passed a low prohibiting it. We are the first to expressly allow it because we are simply fixing the original law that expressly restricted it. The end result is that we will be exactly like those 24 other states that they point out. We are not trying to turn TN into some new first time ever modern wild west show for crying out loud. Legal carry where alcohol is served is old news in half of the country - we are just trying to catch up.

Can anyone find an email address for AG Cooper? I found phone numbers, but no email.

Edited July 7, 2009 by pws_smokeyjones

[Fallguy]

Can anyone find an email address for AG Cooper? I found phone numbers, but no email.

Not sure about an e-mail address. But I did call once and he, or at least someone in his office, did call me back the same day.

[Guest HexHead]

Not sure about an e-mail address. But I did call once and he, or at least someone in his office, did call me back the same day.

I was looking for that when I stumbled on this...

Sunset Grill health dept. score.... 89

Seems like Randy should be worried about his place's cleanliness instead of whether we're carrying or not.

Inspection Violation Results

ITEM CATEGORY DESCRIPTION PTS.

3 Food Protection Potentially hazardous food meets temperature requirements during storage, preparation, display, service, transportation 5

15 Food Equipment and Utensils Non-food contact surfaces designed, constructed, maintained, installed, located 1

22 Food Equipment and Utensils Food-contact surfaces of equipment and utensils clean, free of abrasives, detergents 2

36 Floors, Walls and Ceilings Floors, constructed, drained, clean, good repair, covering, installation, dustless cleaning methods 1

37 Floors, Walls and Ceilings Walls, ceilings, attached equipment, constructed, good repair, clean surfaces, dustless cleaning methods 1

38 Lighting Lighting provided as required, fixtures shielded 1

[Mike.357]

Special interest groups should not be able to dictate the law of the land.

Doc44

Wouldn't HCP holders be considered a special interest group?

Just saying