Tennessean Opinion: Lawmakers play with fire by pushing weapons bill

[Motasyco]

Tennessean opinion piece. Same old story. Bold print copied over and is not mine.

Lawmakers play with fire by pushing weapons bill

Lawmakers play with fire by pushing weapons bill | tennessean.com | The Tennessean

Our View

Once again in 2010, forces are working hard to mix alcohol with firearms in a restaurant or bar near you.

Neither state courts nor the weight of public opinion has deterred them in their zeal to pack heat with utter disregard for the bystanders' safety.

Last year, legislators toed the gun lobby's line in voting to allow people with carry permits to bring firearms into any establishment that serves alcohol, provided the individual "does not consume alcoholic beverages.'' Since permit holders are not required to display their guns, how the bar would know to refuse to serve drinks to that customer was never clear.

The legislation — after some arm-twisting — was changed to allow bars and restaurants to opt out by posting signs. This put business owners in the disastrous position of scaring off patrons with ominous signs banning guns, or risking their employees' safety if they did not post signs, which meant they had to allow guns.

Gov Phil Bredesen, with the strong backing of law-enforcement agencies statewide, vetoed the measure, but legislators quickly overrode his veto. The law was challenged in Davidson County Chancery Court, where it was found to be unconstitutional because it was vague on the type of establishment that would be included.

That should have been the end of it — not because the bill's writers did a poor job, but because the law is opposed by a vast majority of restaurateurs, hospitality/tourism officials, sheriffs and police and, according to various polls, anywhere from 60 to 67 percent of Tennessee residents.

Remember: This is Tennessee, a state that loves its hunting, that prizes individual rights to keep and bear arms more than most — and still most of its citizens understand that bringing guns and booze together is crazy.

Rep. Curry Todd, R-Collierville, and Sen. Doug Jackson, D-Dickson, have retooled last year's law. HB 3125/SB 3012 now spells out that it's OK for permit holders to bring guns into establishments "licensed by the (state) Alcoholic Beverage Commission as a 'restaurant,' provided it is not posted.'' If anything, this bill opens up more establishments and people to risk. It goes before the Senate Finance Committee today after passage by the House Judiciary Committee. Here is why this bill should be defeated:

A carry permit is no assurance of responsibility. At least four unarmed people were shot by carry-permit holders in Tennessee in the two years before last year's bill passage. These were not cases of self-defense or protecting others. Such cases will escalate, because people go to bars to drink, not to sip tea while they polish their semiautomatic pistol.

• It's bad for the economy. Our state is suffering from 10.7 percent unemployment; yet, this bill would keep would-be restaurant and bar patrons at home, and it already is on the radar of national organizations that scout sites for annual trade conventions. It is not on their list of pluses for Tennessee.

• It obstructs law enforcement. The gun lobby says carry-permit holders will be protectors in case a criminal decides to rob the restaurant or go on a killing spree. But this is an egotistical fantasy. Permit holders are taught how to fire a gun; they are not trained in law enforcement or crowd control. It is far more likely they will impede law enforcement officers, accidentally hit bystanders in a shootout, or be shot themselves.

Members of the General Assembly: Even though it's an election year, please find the courage this time to say "No'' to the gun lobby and carry out the will of the people who put you in office. Reject this bill.

[Mark@Sea]

Even thought it's an election year, please risk pissing off a majority by doing what we want....

I'm sick of liars,especially those in the media.

[Smith]

Wow, a prime display of erroneous facts if I ever saw one!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Still, it is a good fish wrapper.

[Guest uofmeet]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, four people were shot bay permit holders......what a travesty. What about the at least 100 people shot in memphis alone who where shot by criminals? and don't care about where, or where not they will illegally carry their illegal weapon. Why don't you guys concentrate your attention on them for a while. And leave us law abiding citizens alone.

[Bigiron]

What do you expect from a liberal rag? Common sense?

[GLOCKMEISTER]

thus the reason i wil NEVER buy another Tennessean ever again....

[Hgunner]

"It's bad for the economy. Our state is suffering from 10.7 percent unemployment; yet, this bill would keep would-be restaurant and bar patrons at home"

Well the current law keeps me at home and only going to places that don't serve the demon brew. And frankly I don't care if I every go into one of these places again, and thats the best way to get the point across, stop going out and let them know why.

[DavidD]

thus the reason i wil NEVER buy another Tennessean ever again....

Yup, the reason I canceled my subscription (was getting Daily plus Sunday). I won't even go to their website.

[macville]

A carry permit is no assurance of responsibility. At least four unarmed people were shot by carry-permit holders in Tennessee in the two years before last year's bill passage. These were not cases of self-defense or protecting others.

You know, getting your facts from VPC isn't always wise. Tell us the four cases or shutup Tennessean...

Such cases will escalate, because people go to bars to drink, not to sip tea while they polish their semiautomatic pistol.

Ummm...so I guess there are never any DD's to take drunk people home huh? I've been to "bars" many time and never had a drop to drink.

It's bad for the economy. Our state is suffering from 10.7 percent unemployment; yet, this bill would keep would-be restaurant and bar patrons at home, and it already is on the radar of national organizations that scout sites for annual trade conventions. It is not on their list of pluses for Tennessee.

Funny, haven't seen states like FL hurt by allowing carry where alcohol is served. Hasn't seemed to affect the other 40 states that allow it either.

• It obstructs law enforcement. The gun lobby says carry-permit holders will be protectors in case a criminal decides to rob the restaurant or go on a killing spree. But this is an egotistical fantasy. Permit holders are taught how to fire a gun; they are not trained in law enforcement or crowd control. It is far more likely they will impede law enforcement officers, accidentally hit bystanders in a shootout, or be shot themselves.

Prove it. Hasn't happened in the past 20-30 years where states have allowed carry out in public. Not sure why it would suddenly happen. Need I mention that cops tend to be even worse shots than most permit holders and love to sling a ton of bullets when they to fire. How is that better than ANY permit holder?

Matthew

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I almost joined just to make a comment, but that is what they want: more words to distort. I wish they would just print news, instead of their opinions.

[Kelemvor]

Jesus, I don't even know where to start on that article. Sounded like a damn woman spouting feelings...

[Guest HvyMtl]

Has anyone organized a boycott of Rayburn's so called restaurants?

As for the Tennessean, I miss the days when it was the conservative rag, and the Nashville Banner was the liberal one...

[OngoingFreedom]

A carry permit is no assurance of responsibility. At least four unarmed people were shot by carry-permit holders in Tennessee in the two years before last year's bill passage. These were not cases of self-defense or protecting others. Such cases will escalate, because people go to bars to drink, not to sip tea while they polish their semiautomatic pistol.

I don't know the circumstances, but isn't this misleading? Could it include disparity of force (woman vs. man, man vs. several men)? Could it include home invasions? In either of those cases a person may use deadly force to defend themselves.

The hand-wringing paranoids at the Tennessean might consult the success of other states who allow weapons where alcohol is served. Heck, some even allow the consumption of alcohol while armed. Where is the blood in the bars there? Where are the tourism deprivations?

Edited March 25, 2010 by OngoingFreedom

[OngoingFreedom]

Double post. Site is acting wonky.

[Mike.357]

Yup, the reason I canceled my subscription (was getting Daily plus Sunday). I won't even go to their website.

obviously I do not subscribe, but I also never ever ever click on links to their website. I do appreciate it when the OP's include the story in their post.

That is one F'd up newspaper.

[Mike.357]

I wish they would just print news, instead of their opinions.

is there such a newspaper?

[daddyo]

Of course, from the time this became law last July, until the time it was repealed by the activist judge, there was not a SINGLE instance of anyone with a HCP accidentally shooting someone, much less in a "bar".

But the Tinnysean won't print that little factoid.

[Guest benchpresspower]

I wasn't aware that somehow the responsibility of protecting myself and my family was directly related to me being egotistical. Good thing they set me straight.

Edited March 25, 2010 by benchpresspower

[Guest TnRebel]

is there such a newspaper?

Yea "Grit" LOL

[Warbird]

Has anyone organized a boycott of Rayburn's so called restaurants?

As for the Tennessean, I miss the days when it was the conservative rag, and the Nashville Banner was the liberal one...

Actually the Banner was traditionally the conservative newspaper. The Tennessean has never been conservative in the least bit. John Siegenthaler ran the Tennessean with an iron fist as a major liberal, only to be followed by more liberals. Funny enough Siegenthaler as head of this First Amendment Center loves to preach against Fox, never mentions other MSM's mind you, and calls news sources today too tied in with politicians and bemoans the loss of the press being completely neutral accept in cases of editorial sections.

What a hypocritical p****. As the publisher of the Tennessean he actually was the campaign manager for the southeast for JFK and then as AA for Pres. Kennedy. He so-called resigned from the Tennessean, but still considered himself non-partisan. Loss of neutrality my a**.

Edited March 26, 2010 by Warbird

[Guest HvyMtl]

Ah, well, that would explain Al Gore writing for the Tennessean as a Journalist...

Now I understand why my parents had a Nashville Banner subscription. Thank you for the correction.

Still, has anyone organized a BOYCOTT of Rayburn's restaurants???

[Warbird]

Ah, well, that would explain Al Gore writing for the Tennessean as a Journalist...

Now I understand why my parents had a Nashville Banner subscription. Thank you for the correction.

Still, has anyone organized a BOYCOTT of Rayburn's restaurants???

Your parents were wise. Likewise my father never took the Tennessean and hated it when the Banner went under. I don't know anyhting about a boycott. Truth be told I imagine many carry permit holder already boycott his restaurants. But the number of people in this area who have permits percentage wise would probably make a boycott difficult to have substantially effect on his businesses.

[Guest HvyMtl]

Just having the permit holders boycott would be no impact. However, getting others (friends, family, political groups, gun activist groups, etc.) would impact his business...

He just seems too smarmy, anyway...

[Guest TnRebel]

Ah, well, that would explain Al Gore writing for the Tennessean as a Journalist...

Now I understand why my parents had a Nashville Banner subscription. Thank you for the correction.

Still, has anyone organized a BOYCOTT of Rayburn's restaurants???

What restaurants dose he own ... besides the Sunset Grill ?