Restaurant Carry Law ruled Void!

[Punisher84]

"clean bill types" like me were going to ruin this whole thing at the beginning of the year. All of the apologists that didn't want to fight for a clean bill: suck one. We're back to zero. How does it feel?

It feels like crap and we all called it. A clean bill on parks and restaurants would have upheld in court.

Two steps forward one step back. Had a "clean bill" been passed it would have been challenged as well. Then what? It leaves no answer to an argument. Sometimes you have to work through their stupidity with them. This is how difficult things get passed. Relax.

Challenged yes. Overturned? I doubt it.

You can stow that attitude.

David he's right man! Attitude or not it's a valid point. Everybody slammed those of us that wanted a straight up bill and accused us of derailing the bill,etc Now it got overturned so who was right?

[strickj]

We can play a hypothetical game of legal what-ifs all day.

We don;t need to be blaming fellow supporters over what happened.

Blame the ones who did this.

Fact is,an 'unclean' bill is that what was passed based on what our guys in the know felt would work.

I'll take their word over what they think will work over the opinion of some random internet guy....

[Guest HexHead]

I was told it goes into effect immediately...

By whom?

[Guest HexHead]

We only had right to carry in National Parks two months or so, best I remember.

- OS

But that comes roaring back on Feb. 22nd. And it was signed by 0bama!

[Fallguy]

Since this is a Davidson County court, does it have any effect on the rest of the state, except maybe to set a precedent?

AFAIK this effects the law itself. So since the law is void, it would effect the entire state.

Again AFAIK, this was heard in Davidson Co Court because Nashville is the state capitol. Therefore any challenge to a state level thing is filed in Nashville/Davidson County.

"clean bill types" like me were going to ruin this whole thing at the beginning of the year. All of the apologists that didn't want to fight for a clean bill: suck one. We're back to zero. How does it feel?

I thought this was a "clean" bill compare to what some wanted (curfew and age limit)?

As I said I would like to just a see a general exception for HCP holders, but I don't think that was ever discussed on here or in the legislature.

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

Judge Rules 'Guns In Bars' Law Is Unconstitutional - Nashville News Story - WSMV Nashville

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- A judge ruled Friday that a new law allowing handguns in Tennessee bars and restaurants is unconstitutional.

Chancellor Claudia Bonnyman said the law, enacted earlier this year over the veto of Gov. Phil Bredesen, is "fraught with ambiguity."

She ruled after an hour of arguments in a suit brought by a group of Tennesseans, many of them restaurant owners. The law allowed handgun permit holders to take their weapons into places serving alcohol, providing the establishment makes more than 50 percent of its profits from food.

There was no immediate word from attorneys for the state about an appeal.

The measure took effect July 14. Thirty-seven states had similar legislation at the time.

Many restaurants across the state opted out of the law under a provision allowing them to do so.

The legislation retained an existing ban on consuming alcohol while carrying a handgun.

Nevertheless, critics complained that guns and alcohol in close proximity are a dangerous combination.

Of the roughly 218,000 handgun permit holders in Tennessee, 278 had their permits revoked last year, records showed. Since 2005, state records show nearly 1,200 people have lost their permits.

Rep. Curry Todd, a main sponsor of the measure, said he hadn't seen the ruling but disputed that the law is vague. The Collierville Republican said he will introduce legislation in January to fix any legal problems.

Todd said he will also ask the state attorney general to appeal the ruling.

[TNRobocop]

The law as it was written was f*cking stupid.

It needs to be passed where restaurant owners have no say in it , just like the banning of smoking in restaurants.

The state has the right to regulate carrying/wearing of weapons with an eye towards public safety or something to that effect.

That should mean that the state can say where and when, no some petty owner of dive.

[Guest HexHead]

I told you guys this really had me worried because it was flying so far under the radar. I knew bringing in this politically connected Cheek guy was a game changer from just that idiot Dread. I can't imagine the AG put up much of a fight either, given his last couple of opinions, like city parks don't have to post regardless of what the law states.

I guess I'll just go back to doing what I did before July 14th and well, concealed means concealed. I don't have any problem becoming a criminal and if anyone wants to make a scene about it, they're liable to get their ass capped.

[Guest jg45]

AFAIK this effects the law itself. So since the law is void, it would effect the entire state.

Again AFAIK, this was heard in Davidson Co Court because Nashville is the state capitol. Therefore any challenge to a state level thing is filed in Nashville/Davidson County.

Chancery judges are elected by the people of the district they preside over. It doesn't make sense that they would have the ability to rule on the legality of a state law and their injunction would affect the entire state. But since when does logic play into politics and the legal system.

[Daniel]

great.

[macville]

So what the heck does this ruling actually mean for us today? Does that mean it's now illegal again for us to carry in Applebee's?

Matthew

[Punisher84]

The whole thing is bogus. I'm moving to Vermont. F this stupid state.

[Daniel]

I told you guys this really had me worried because it was flying so far under the radar. I knew bringing in this politically connected Cheek guy was a game changer from just that idiot Dread. I can't imagine the AG put up much of a fight either, given his last couple of opinions, like city parks don't have to post regardless of what the law states.

I guess I'll just go back to doing what I did before July 14th and well, concealed means concealed. I don't have any problem becoming a criminal and if anyone wants to make a scene about it, they're liable to get their ass capped.

I seriously just loled.

[Daniel]

yes

[Guest HexHead]

I know Todd is saying "we'll fix it in January", but the big question now if after all the hoopla last summer, does the State House still have the stomach for it? Will it pass again with even less restrictions? If it does, you know Phil will veto it again. And then will there still be the votes to override him again on this issue? You know now that the liberals and the media have smelled, no tasted blood in the water there will likely be MUCH MORE opposition this time around. This time will make last summer's proceedings look like a cake walk.

BEST case scenario, it'll be July again before we can legally carry again.

[Guest HexHead]

All I want to add is this...

Okay Senator Jackson, so what's the contingency plan? You guys have known this could happen for months now. Surely there was a plan in the event of it turning out this way?

[dralarms]

:poop::poop::poop:

I just broke the law. I just got back from Ruby Tuesdays and carried. I was not aware of this crap. I can't beleive these dumb:poop:s.

[pitt2magic]

Not really sure that one TN judge can over rule the state law makers.

[Daniel]

While ignoring the fact that nothing happened while it was legal.

[Motasyco]

I feel like

[TMMT]

More good news from "Gun Friendly Tennessee"...

[Fallguy]

Chancery judges are elected by the people of the district they preside over. It doesn't make sense that they would have the ability to rule on the legality of a state law and their injunction would affect the entire state. But since when does logic play into politics and the legal system.

I think below is the state law that says such a suit is to be filed in the chancery court of Davidson County.

4-5-255 Declaratory judgments.

(a) The legal validity or applicability of a statute, rule or order of an agency to specified circumstances may be determined in a suit for a declaratory judgment in the chancery court of Davidson County, unless otherwise specifically provided by statute, if the court finds that the statute, rule or order, or its threatened application, interferes with or impairs, or threatens to interfere with or impair, the legal rights or privileges of the complainant. The agency shall be made a party to the suit.

[Guest HexHead]

While ignoring the fact that nothing happened while it was legal.

When have facts EVER stood in the way of a liberal's emotions?

[Oh Shoot]

But that comes roaring back on Feb. 22nd. And it was signed by 0bama!

I wouldn't bet the farm that it won't be somehow nuked again at some point, though.

- OS

[Fallguy]

MULTIPLE threads merged