Curry Todd is da man.....

[JeffL]

I'm a big boy, I don't need the government to tell me when to stop drinking. These new laws are bad for businesses and will not help drunk driving. The 50% rule is retarded anyway.

[Guest HexHead]

I'm a big boy, I don't need the government to tell me when to stop drinking. These new laws are bad for businesses and will not help drunk driving. The 50% rule is retarded anyway.

I've got news for you, most states use that as a measure for differentiating restaurants from bars. The difference here, is that we don't have any "bars". For an establishment to get a liquor by the drink license, they MUST be a restaurant by the ABC's definition. That law hasn't been enforced. At all. Not even a little bit. And the fact that law isn't enforced gave Bonneyman the tool to declare HB0962 unconstitutional. Todd is saying if we're going to have that law, and use that definition, then it must be enforced. I don't see anything wrong with that. That it will shove our foot up our opponent's ass is icing on the cake.

That ****ing idiot Sam that owns Sam's Sports Bar in Hillsboro Village testified that he didn't know if his place was a bar or a restaurant. He'll have to figure it out or lose his liquor license. Good. **** him and the horse he rode in on.

I don't see the curfew bill passing, however it can be used as additional leverage. But I find it hard to see opposing a bill that says "enforce the existing law".

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If you throw their stupidity back in their face, they have to deal with it one way or the other. If this messes with Bonnyman's ruling, then it is a good thing. Activist judges

need to go away. I hope it is a big enough of a fire under their tails to make them do

the right thing.

[-boatman-]

Randy Rayburn has now spoken about this:

Guest editorial: Bill puts at risk a major industry | tennessean.com | The Tennessean

He is now talking about property rights among other things but conveniently leaves out that he could post his business. He makes it sound like he would be forced to allow firearms in his business.

[Worriedman]

Randy Rayburn has now spoken about this:

Guest editorial: Bill puts at risk a major industry | tennessean.com | The Tennessean

He is now talking about property rights among other things but conveniently leaves out that he could post his business. He makes it sound like he would be forced to allow firearms in his business.

I am going to have some fun with this.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Looks like it:D He is a coward. I liked your post to the Tennessean, Worriedman;)

[Worriedman]

Looks like it:D He is a coward. I liked your post to the Tennessean, Worriedman;)

Simply the first of many. I have know him since we were in high school and have his measure.

The audacity to suggest that McWherter was a farmer is laughable, he made his fortune selling beer.

There are so many opportunities to beat that article up that I shall revel in the exchange that is to come.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I knew about Ned Ray's beer empire. That was a nonstarter for me. Keep up the good work. It's very entertaining to watch a hypocrite get exposed:D

[RobD]

I just had an epiphany....Have him submit a real retribution bill. Take away all the tax payer funded body guards for judges....make them defend themselves..might save us all alot of hasle :D:D and might even change a few of there tiny liberal minds....

[ngoeser59]

CURRY TODD IS DA' MAN!!!! THAT MAN HAS GOT SOME B***S! I have gotten to know Curry working at the Legislature and I gotta tell ya', he is a super person and he is standing up for us BIGTIME. He is pretty much saying okay guys (Randy Rayburn, Walt Baker, ABC, Judge Bonnyman, Media) there are no BARS in Tn so then let's start making these Restaurants act like Restaurants and follow the rules like they should have been all these years. You solve that and then you won't have any "guns in bars". THERE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ANY BARS ANYWAY. The Citizens have a right to self defense. More people die because of drunk driving then any gun deaths. I think Curry is trying to make a point here.

HB2675

Generally, present law authorizes the consumption of alcoholic beverages on the premises of a restaurant licensed by the alcoholic beverage commission located within a political subdivision that allows such consumption. Generally, an establishment is eligible for such licensure if the establishment is open at least three days a week, with the exception of holidays, vacations and periods of redecorating, and if the serving of meals is the principal business conducted each day the restaurant is open.

Under this bill, the alcoholic beverage commission must require any person seeking to obtain or renew such a restaurant license to submit, under oath, information with the application regarding estimated monthly food sales. Such information would include percentage of food sales in relation to all sales by the restaurant and any other information the commission may require in order to ascertain that the serving of meals is the principal business conducted each day the restaurant is open. The commission may require persons holding a restaurant license to more frequently report information regarding the restaurant's food sales. The commission may not grant a license to or renew a license of any restaurant that fails to submit such information or whose submitted information fails to show that the serving of meals is the principal business conducted each day the restaurant is open.

HB3637

Alcoholic Beverages - As introduced, prohibits the sale, distribution, or consumption of alcoholic beverages, wine, or beer between the hours of midnight and 8:00 a.m. at any establishment or facility receiving a license or permit to operate by the state, county, or municipality. - Amends TCA Title 5; Title 6; Title 7; Title 57 and Title 67.

HB3125

Handgun Permits - As introduced, allows person with handgun carry permit to possess handgun in establishment licensed by alcoholic beverage commission as a "restaurant," provided it is not posted; increases penalty for permit holder consuming alcohol within such an establishment; clarifies and makes uniform language constituting valid posting and increases penalty for unlawfully carrying firearm in place where alcohol served for consumption on-premises. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13; Section 57-3-204 and Section 57-4-203.

Edited February 13, 2010 by ngoeser59

[ngoeser59]

All of us here at TGO need to support Representative Curry Todd. When this Restaurant Carry Bill starts moving through Committee we need to be there. I am somewhat limited in what I can do now that I work for the Legislature but I can at least get you guys riled up enough to show up for these Committee meetings and show up in large numbers on the Capitol steps when the time is right. It's very very important that we remain diligent and steadfast on this issue. Word of mouth is very powerful and there is strength in numbers. Complacency is not an option. We have to get this thing passed. Email, Call & get together in groups within your community and try to get an appointment with the Representative for your District. If you want Restaurant Carry to pass.....you must be active in seeing it is taken seriously.

[Guest Drewsett]

No offense, but I don't recall any right to booze or drinking in public. I work 3rd shift so I never get to go out and drink. Just food for thought.

Have your buddies pick up a 12 pack and go drink at home. Cheaper, safer, do what you want, don't get liquored up and end up coming to see me at 3am after you've wrapped your car around a tree.

Punisher, I did say that "right" wasn't the proper word...don't get all nitpicky on me . I wouldn't have my buddies go pick up a 12 pack and go drink at home because my wife is up early and sleeps directly above my living room where me and my buddies (usually between 5-10 guys) would hang out...not to mention I only have seating for 5.

Also, I don't get "liquored up". I am 6'2'' 260lbs. I never have more than two drinks in an hour. I drink the same volume in water as I do in alcohol. And if I have to drive I never have more than beer or wine and I never have more than two, even if I'm there more than an hour. I have blown in a breathalyzer once at a sobriety checkpoint. I had been at the bar an hour, I had two drinks (one per 30 mins) and finished the last one 15 minutes before I was pulled over. I blew .02 and felt no impairment whatsoever. Not to mention I've never been in a wreck, I've never had a speeding ticket. The odds of me wrapping my car around a tree are slim to none. Oh and the one time I did have too much to drink while out with friends where I would have needed to drive...I called my wife and she came and got me. We got the car the next day.

Seems to me that "retaliatory" is not only a tool of the immature. I would suggest that our dealings with Japan after Pearl Harbor, and the Battle of San Jacinto fall under that heading as well.

The word means to "repay in kind". I see the proposal of this Bill as a natural step in the progression of the game that is afoot. All the other side had to do was accept HB 0962 and post if they were vehemently opposed to carry on their premises. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

I am much more a New Testament Christian than I am an Old Testament Christian. I prefer to turn the other cheek rather than take an eye for an eye. Gandhi had it right...I have no desire to be blind or to blind anyone else, much less the world. I also live by the Golden Rule and always try to treat others as I would want to be treated. This includes "retaliatory" legislation. I will support the legislation because I would like to see separate categories established in the ABC code for bars and restaurants. I work in the industry and having managed several establishments I would appreciate the distinction be made official for reasons even beyond the "guns in bars" dispute.

I could be wrong, but I doubt this bill has much of a chance of passing.

But it may very well serve a couple of purposes.

One, if you think there is a problem with guns and alcohol in the same room, maybe the alcohol is equally the problems as well as the gun. Not that I think either is, but it could make a few think.

Secondly, I wonder if it is just a tool to help the new restaurant carry bill have a smoother track. Don't oppose the new bill and I won't push this bill.

Saw a clip on WBBJ last night with Curry. Had to laugh at a few that said it was their "right" to drink. Not that I disagree, but it's funny how now in TN drinking is seen more favorably that carrying a firearm.

The even contacted the local PD...their take was that more crimes happen after dark, not just after midnight. Now this is the same PD that wanted to charge local "bars" a fee so they could post patrol cars out front at closing because of all the problems.

But anyway...

....and for the record, I do partake of adult beverages.

Fallguy I think the idea of introducing alcohol as the problem in the guns+alcohol equation is a great one...hopefully it WILL make people think! I do think that the majority of people see it as their "right" to drink (and I am one of them because I don't think the government should have the power to regulate what I do or do not choose to put into my body). I think that all the discussion of selling wine in grocery stores is proof that the public will certainly not look kindly on any law restricting the sale or consumption of alcohol. Historically once alcohol restrictions are repealed they are rarely to never reintroduced.

I do support the bill, but I don't think I'll find myself holding a sign in front of the state capitol building either.

Edited February 13, 2010 by Drewsett

[Guest 270win]

I don't agree with this bill for the pure fact that Mississippi closes bars down at 1AM...nothing like 1AM is much different than 12AM and makes any real difference. People who want to cause trouble are going to cause trouble. Focus on the trouble makers and leave those alone who want to have a drink at 2AM alone and those who want to carry a handgun legally wherever we please. Blaming objects, like alcohol or guns, instead of trouble makers is the liberal way. We should hold the INDIVIDUAL responsible for bad actions....not the object.

[volshayes]

A short email sent to all House & Senate members today re: the subject in this thread and some other 2nd Amendment bills. A little reminder at the end that elections are in November.

"This is to ask that you support the bills which follow:

(1) HB2675/SB2758 (Todd/Jackson) - These bills are necessary to further clarify the definition of restaurants in Tennessee and to assure their compliance of that definition.

(2) HB3637/SB3156 (Todd/Faulk) - These bills would make the roads safer in Tennessee. As one of the sponsors has said, no good comes from serving liquor after midnight.

(3) One of the versions of the bills that allow permit holders to carry their weapons in restaurants that serve alcohol. It is unfortunate that we have to spend time once again on this issue, but it is a necessary fight that must be won to allow permit holders to fully exercise their 2nd Amendment rights in the State of Tennessee. The bills are HB1807/SB0576, HB3125/SB3012, or HB2694/SB3735. HB3712/SB3714 should be defeated in subcommittee.

(4) HB3240/SB2391 removing authority of Governor to commandeer weapons in a state of emergency.

(5) HB1806/SB1622 and HB1805/SB1619 allowing weapons on school ground if not handled by permit holder and clarifying permit holder carry in parks, respectively.

Thanks to those supporting these bills. We look forward to supporting candidates in the exciting, upcoming November elections that support the 2nd Amendment rights of Tennesseans."

[Guest 270win]

I like the bill for the most part introduced by Jackson SB0576 that creates an exemption for those with permits to carry in places that serve alcohol......whether it be a ball park, a restaurant, a movie theater..........this whole 'restaurant' crap is silly. Why does it matter whether the place is a gas station, liquor store, restaurant, theater, or whatever? As long as the licensee/permit holder isn't getting drunk, which doesn't seem to be a problem since you can't EVEN DRINK a drop with anything proposed.....who cares where the carrying is?