Nashville Parks Carry

[Guest Ravendove]

My understanding is that Metro will be voting on this soon. I've written the council members a letter. Here is what it said. Let me know if it should have been improved upon so I can do a better job next time.

Dear esteemed member of the Council,

I am a Nashville resident and I would like to voice my support for the “Park Carry†law. My reasoning is as follows. As a citizen, both of this state and this country, I feel it is my right and responsibility to protect myself and my family. I don't, however, feel that this should be so in some public places and not others. By and large, the most common argument to ban carry in parks is the issue of firearms near children. If you consider the current state of carry laws, this argument doesn't hold up. For instance, children are also in attendance in large numbers at places like McDonalds, Dairy Queen, Sonic, in movie theaters, at Wall-Mart and other grocery stores. They play in their front yards and in the street. These are all places that Handgun Carry Permit holders have been allowed to go armed for over a decade. If “HCP†holders were really a danger to children, history would have shown this. It hasn't. In fact, it has shown that they are very responsible and take quite seriously the implications of carrying or using firearms in any setting, especially those with children present. The misuse of firearms is something that HCP holders take great strides to avoid and that, of course, means that using a firearm to settle an argument, heated or otherwise, is something permit holders simply would not do. We know the laws regarding legal carry and we follow them very aptly. I feel it is a mistake to look at this with questions such as “Why should it be allowedâ€. Instead, “Why shouldn't it be allowed†should be the question asked, and as I've pointed out, there is no logical reason that it shouldn't. I ask you to please support my right to protect my family and myself in public parks or any other public place I choose to spend my leisure time and I thank you for taking the time to hear my point of view.

Sincerely, ************

[Fallguy]

The only thing I made have said different is, voicing your opposition to the resolution banning handgun carry, since that is what the proposed resolution would do.

Saying you are for the park carry law, could be interpreted by some to mean you are in favor of the resolution to prohibit carry.

However if they read the rest of the message it should be clear of course, but that opening line is what gets the readers attention.

[Guest Ravendove]

I was actually a little worried about that as I wrote it. I'll probably be more careful about that in the future.

As an aside, I've gotten three responses so far. Two were auto replies, stating that they were on vacation. The third was Rip Ryman, who said "Thanks for your comments, but I completely disagree with you on caring fire arms in parks." And yes, the typo was his. I emailed him back asking for his reasoning but have yet to get a response. I doubt seriously that I will.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

Rip's a great guy... he is progun and pro HCP. We simply disagree on this issue. But this is something he has to do. The city of Goodlettsville is chimming in big time because of Moss Wright park. No one is really bending his ear any other way.

So he's doing what his district is telling him they want. I dont see him changing his mind. Keep in mind Rip was one that was on our side in the resturants issue.

[-boatman-]

I like the way you stated that children are already around firearms in these other places and have not been harmed. I think that was a good point.

[Guest Ravendove]

Yeah, I guess he shouldn't go against what his constituents tell him. I just wish I could count on more of those constituents to be basing their opinions of this issue on facts instead of hearsay and biased misinformation. It's easy to say "guns are dangerous so I don't want them near my kids." I guess that's why so many people jump on that side rather than making the effort to seek out the facts and educate themselves on what's really going on. I suppose, when it comes right down to it, it's nothing but laziness. Then again, the facts haven't really been made all that easy to find.

[Defender]

I e-mailed ALL of the Metro Councilmembers urging them to not support opting out of parks carry. I got ONE response. It was from District 8 Councilwoman Karen Bennett, and she said she was on our side of this issue. She also said that unless some councilmembers changed their minds, we were gonna lose this one...we need more support on this...call or e-mail the Metro council now~!

[Guest Ravendove]

Well, I just sent them another email. I kept it brief and argued some points brought up in the council meeting. Hopefully it will at least get some of them to think about it.

[Guest donfromtexas]

I would gather some information about crimes in the parks where you live and point that out also. Have there been any child abductions? Rapes? Robberies? Could any of these been prevented if an authorized armed citizen been around.

I personally think any place that has a "no guns" rule opens themselves up for crime and advertises to the criminals that you can "come on in and take or do what you want", nobody here is armed and will not be able to stop you.

[Guest Ravendove]

I completely understand where you're coming from with the idea that HCP holders can stop crimes in progress, but I try not to argue that fact for a couple of reasons. The first being that unless someone's life is on the line and I know for sure what's going on, I'm not stepping in. I feel that other people's safety is their responsibility and I'm not going to get into a situation that could be different than it appears. I try not to argue for something I wouldn't do.

Another reason is that the people on the other side of this argument make a lot of fantastical claims of tragedies and such that could happen if we're allowed to carry our weapons. I'm not saying that an HCP holder coming to someone's aid is the same kind of story, but it isn't hard to see how the opposition could claim that it is and discredit us with the argument that we're dreaming up imaginary scenarios.

The last thing that I'll say about it is that the opposing side can and does try to turn it around, when we say we can help, by claiming that shows we're trigger happy vigilantes who think we're the police. And believe me, I've never been so damn tired of the word vigilante.

Now, I'm not saying that no one should use that argument, I'm just saying I don't think it should be a main point. I personally am going to avoid it altogether. However, I will still be gathering data to support that argument. If someone else uses it and I see someone try to refute it with claims of stray bullets and lack of training, I'll have some factual evidence to suggest the opposite.

On the point of the crime information, which was probably the main point of what you were trying to tell me in the first place, that's a good idea and I'll definitely look into it. I found some information on that a little while back but I forgot where it was. It might have been the Tennessean website or TN.gov. I'll just have to look again and I'll be sure to stop off at the department of safety website. If you know of any others, I'd be appreciative of the information.

[Fallguy]

Me personally, when I talk about or hear others talking about preventing crime by carrying, I just think about it meaning the person that is armed preventing a crime from occuring to them or their family, not necessarly preventing crimes from occuring to others.

[Worriedman]

The fact that a criminal MAY decide to chose another venue due to the fact that he could not anticipate which of the individuals present in a non-posted area MIGHT be armed, (concealed carry) and hence ready to provide defense against an assault or robbery, would in fact help to prevent crime by it's presenting that possibility. How could they know if the soccer mom has a heater in the handbag?

Any one of the flock of sheep might be a sheepdog in disguise, IF they are allowed to carry.

[Guest Ravendove]

That's true. I do point that out myself from time to time.

[Guest Tango]

I e-mailed ALL of the Metro Councilmembers urging them to not support opting out of parks carry. I got ONE response. It was from District 8 Councilwoman Karen Bennett, and she said she was on our side of this issue.

...responses, one from Bennett and one from Crafton. Both oppose opting out of park carry.

Yes, we're gonna lose it if some of the council don't change their minds.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Tango

[Guest archerdr1]

I just wish these guys would stop looking at this in emotion and look at it from a constitutional view. The 2A says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." I think that should say to the council "No matter what, stay off of this" since that is what it is saying! I have some issues with city council even listening to the constituents on this one due to the fact that the 2A says "Shall not be INFRINGED". I think they should just say, "I understand how you feel on this, but this is something that I personally don't believe that I am allowed to do" and leave it at that.