Poll: So if Rayburn, Dread et al succeed in getting an injunction....

[Guest HexHead]

to stop the lawful carry by permit holders in non-posted establishments, do you intend to take the "the law was passed" approach and say screw the injunction and carry anyway? Aye or Nay?

[Guest m&pc9]

I would like to know if HCP holders could Do the same thing and get an injunction on the injunction.

[Guest GlockRule]

Well, I would like to know exactly which restaurants are represented by this lawsuit-because I will NEVER patronize those establishments again. We already know Rayburn represents Sunset Grill, Cabana, and Midtown Cafe so where else will I not dine in the future? Whether they are successful or not-it's their intent I have an issue with.

[Billco]

Did anyone hear Rep Henry Fincher's comment to channel 5 news tonight?

He said "People have been carrying guns into resteraunts since 1994 an as far as I know the Golden Corral hasn't turned into the OK Corral yet". He also said he feels that they do not have legal grounds to file the suit, and that it's a waste of money doing so.

I like his style!!

[macville]

Did anyone hear Rep Henry Fincher's comment to channel 5 news tonight?

He said "People have been carrying guns into resteraunts since 1994 an as far as I know the Golden Corral hasn't turned into the OK Corral yet". He also said he feels that they do not have legal grounds to file the suit, and that it's a waste of money doing so.

I like his style!!

Actually, isn't it a waste of OUR (taxpayer) money since the lawsuit will have to be defended by the state? Seems like if the idiots lose, then they should have to pay the state for their lawyer bills.

Matthew

[Guest BillOfRightsFan]

I would not carry into establishments during an injunction because I am not under threat. I just don't have any enemies to worry about. The main reason I see for the law is to re-establish our inherent right to self-defense. We are a nation of laws. Sometimes those laws reflect the men and women who wrote them (flawed, kooky, sometimes demented) but they are the laws none the less that seperate us from the other places on the planet that are much less nice.

While prevented from my right to self-defense, however, I would work hard at getting those laws changed. NRA-ILA is your friend in these times in my opinion (albiet a freshman opinion).

[Guest bkelm18]

I would not carry into establishments during an injunction because I am not under threat. I just don't have any enemies to worry about. The main reason I see for the law is to re-establish our inherent right to self-defense. We are a nation of laws. Sometimes those laws reflect the men and women who wrote them (flawed, kooky, sometimes demented) but they are the laws none the less that seperate us from the other places on the planet that are much less nice.

While prevented from my right to self-defense, however, I would work hard at getting those laws changed. NRA-ILA is your friend in these times in my opinion (albiet a freshman opinion).

So the random guy who points a gun at your head while demanding money for his crack habits is not your enemy? It's not your enemies you should be concerned with, it's the guy who you've never seen before in your life that's about to knife you that you should be concerned about.

[Smith]

I would not carry into establishments during an injunction because I am not under threat. I just don't have any enemies to worry about. The main reason I see for the law is to re-establish our inherent right to self-defense. We are a nation of laws. Sometimes those laws reflect the men and women who wrote them (flawed, kooky, sometimes demented) but they are the laws none the less that seperate us from the other places on the planet that are much less nice.

While prevented from my right to self-defense, however, I would work hard at getting those laws changed. NRA-ILA is your friend in these times in my opinion (albiet a freshman opinion).

No those laws are only a reflection of what separate us. It is our morality, character, and world view perspective that separate us. Unfortunately the divide is narrowing.

BTW I doubt 98% of us who carry are "under" threat. However, we do want to be able to respond in like kind if and when do come under threat. If you could plan it out you could just call the police to meet you there.

[Guest m&pc9]

I would not carry into establishments during an injunction because I am not under threat.

Here in Knoxville I see on the news murders,Rapes and assaults every night. I think just going out of my house my family and me are under threat.

[Worriedman]

George Washington said, "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"

That from one of our founders.

“The Second Amendment is not about duck hunting, and I know I’m not going to make very many friends saying this, but it’s about our right, all of our right to be able to protect ourselves from all of you guys up there.â€

Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp, appearing before Representative Charles Schumer’s committee hearings on the assault weapons ban.

This from a woman who watched her Father die at the hand of a man who had never threatened him, and subsequently killed her Mother, who was cradling her dying husbands head in her lap, in a Luby's Restaurant.

The Texas Luby's Massacre is the best example I know of for the need for the average citizen to be able to protect themselves. There was no alcohol involved, there was no political motive for the 26 deaths and over 20 woundings that day, all which took place in less than fifteen minutes when Evil drove a pickup through the front of the restaurant and began indiscriminately shooting patrons at their mid day meals.

We are all under threat, every day.

[Guest HexHead]

While prevented from my right to self-defense, however, I would work hard at getting those laws changed. NRA-ILA is your friend in these times in my opinion (albiet a freshman opinion).

It remains to be seen how much a friend the NRA-ILA is going to be on this. As a life member of the NRA, I hope you're right. I've already been in touch with them.

In the meantime, civil disobedience may be called for. One liberal judge shouldn't be able to overturn the will of the people. There has to be a point where we just say "No Mas" and take a stand.

[RinTN]

So, just how private are the votes on these polls? ;-)

[TGO David]

An injunction would postpone the law going into effect. If that happens, you would be breaking the law if you carry into a place that serves alcohol and is not otherwise posted.

So this thread really should be: Hey, how many of you are going to break the law on July 14th?

Maybe start a new poll with that title and let me know so that I can call the media and direct them to a thread where supposedly responsible, upright citizens are indicating that they intend to do something unlawful.

Seriously, think before you post a thread.

[Fallguy]

Dave beat me to it. But since he didn't close the thread, neither will I.

If a judge in a court of law issues an injunction, then regardless of what passed in the legislature, it will be illegal to carry in restaurants that serve alcohol until that injunction is lifted.

Remember...we're not supposed to discuss illegal activity on the board.

[Worriedman]

I concur 100% with TGO David and Fallguy. We should, as HCP holders, epitomize adherence to the law. We for sure should do everything possibly within our reach to support our Constitutional Rights and defeat this usurpation of the intent of the Legislature, but if the legal system hands us an injunction, it would be counter productive to the grand scheme that we hope to achieve to violate the law. Becoming criminals to show our displeasure at this point would only prove the other side's points.

It would simply play into the opposition's hands to fail to continue to be law abiding, regardless of our distaste for the tactics being used to limit our rights.

[Guest HexHead]

I understand all three of your points and have to ask this....

At what point do we just say we've had enough of this crap? We've waited YEARS to get rid of the roadblock to restaurant carry (and many other guns bills) named Naifeh and we've finally gotten sensible laws passed by both chambers of the state legislature by an overwhelming majority.

Do we at this point just roll over and play dead because one restauranteur who's trying to do what even the Governor couldn't do, got himself a couple of ambulance chasers and will possibly find a single liberal judge to stick this up all of our asses?

I'm done with the 'high road approach". Don't forget, I was the one that kept saying this could become the "bridge too far" without some restrictions and most everyone shouted me down about it. I admitted I was wrong, that a clean bill could get passed. And it did.

I've been waiting 9 years to be able to just go into a restaurant and enjoy my meal like I can in every other state around us, and the State finally gave us that RIGHT. And I'll be damned if a couple of asshats are going to take it away from me.

I'm done being Mr Complacent. It's about time we say "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead".

[Guest HexHead]

So this thread really should be: Hey, how many of you are going to break the law on July 14th?

Maybe start a new poll with that title and let me know so that I can call the media and direct them to a thread where supposedly responsible, upright citizens are indicating that they intend to do something unlawful.

Seriously, think before you post a thread.

That would be premature at this point, but if you want to put up a poll How many of you are tired of this crap and are willing to break the law come July 14th? , that's another issue. ;)

[TGO David]

Hex, the beauty of the American system is such that if you don't like the laws of a particular State you can either vote to affect change or you can move to a state with laws more to your liking.

So when you hit the point that you've had more than you can take of the nonsense here in Tennessee, which I do agree is completely nonsensical, the lawful recourse would be to pack up and move to another state.

Or you can stick it out here and fight the good fight with the rest of us, but do so legally.

[Guest HexHead]

Hex, the beauty of the American system is such that if you don't like the laws of a particular State you can either vote to affect change or you can move to a state with laws more to your liking.

So when you hit the point that you've had more than you can take of the nonsense here in Tennessee, which I do agree is completely nonsensical, the lawful recourse would be to pack up and move to another state.

Or you can stick it out here and fight the good fight with the rest of us, but do so legally.

How far would civil rights have gotten if Rosa Parks had moved her seat or if the lunch counter sit-ins didn't occur?

We did vote to affect change, and we succeeded. Now you're just willing to hand it back?

[Fallguy]

Hex, the beauty of the American system is such that if you don't like the laws of a particular State you can either vote to affect change or you can move to a state with laws more to your liking.

So when you hit the point that you've had more than you can take of the nonsense here in Tennessee, which I do agree is completely nonsensical, the lawful recourse would be to pack up and move to another state.

Or you can stick it out here and fight the good fight with the rest of us, but do so legally.

Exactly!

By no means am I rolling over or being complacent.

I'm also not saying what I may or may not do on personal level, however advocating breaking the law on a public forum simply because you don't, like it is not the best way to affect change....IMO

[RotorHead]

I would not carry if there is a legal injunction. That is just what they want us to do, so they can point their fingers at us as law breakers.

[Guest HexHead]

I would not carry if there is a legal injunction. That is just what they want us to do, so they can point their fingers at us as law breakers.

Do you seriously think if we don't they are going to change their minds???

We've had almost 15 years of being model citizens, dotting all the 'i"s and crossing all the "t"s, and look at the that's been heaped on us.

[Guest canynracer]

Hex...look, it seems that you are passionate about this, and that is great...but, this is not a forum that will advocate breaking the law, and rallying others to do so.

You have a point, but here is the reality, you HAVE waited for YEARS (your words)....and now, there are SOME that will post...who cares? go to the others that dont post. its not the high road...fight with your money......

just take a deep breath, and remember, we are not going to advocate breaking any laws...no matter how "fed up" we are.

[Guest HexHead]

You have a point, but here is the reality, you HAVE waited for YEARS (your words)....and now, there are SOME that will post...who cares? go to the others that dont post. its not the high road...fight with your money......

I have no problem with individual establishments that post, or even groups like the 'hospitality" organization getting signs made.

My issue is purely with a couple of ambulance chasers trying to deprive us of our hard won rights, taking a page from the ACLU playbook. What they can't accomplish through the legislature, they will attack through the courts to strip us of our rights they don't agree with.

This is far more important than "we just don't talk about those things here". This is something that I'm glad the thread hasn't been closed, because it needs to be discussed as it potentially can have a real effect on the majority of TGO members.

Does anyone know if we'll all be at the mercy of the luck of the draw as to which judge might hear this? Or will they be able to "judge shop" to get a liberal judge that has no problem "legislating from the bench"?

Have you read the whole 30 pages of the suit they filed? I have and it's a work of art. While most of us that are familiar with the facts and the thinking behind this law will mock it for various faults, it was carefully crafted to sway someone even remotely in the "guns and alcohol don't mix" camp. Unless it goes to a judge with an HCP, an NRA membership card and a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment, we could be in real trouble with this. If it goes to an activist liberal judge, we're sunk.

[Guest canynracer]

HOW are they going to deprive us?? look at the numbers that passed the bill...it was a landslide...the ACLU doesnt win every case...they wont win this one...

they already lost.