Is the cost of the TN HCP equal to a de facto ban on poor people?

[sigmtnman]

Tennessee State Constitution

§ 26. Weapons; right to bear arms

That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.

It may seem unfair to the poor, but don't forget we have the richest best off poor in world. They have cars and big screen TV's,

welfare and foodstamps. Saving for a permit and a handgun should not be a issue, but more a matter of priorities.

Your sig is at odds with your opinion.

[Hgunner]

You may be right, its more in how they interpret "with a view to prevent crime".

My interpetation is not their interpretation.

Oh and I was just pointing out their legal athority.

[JAB]

Tennessee State Constitution

§ 26. Weapons; right to bear arms

That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.

So, accepting that those who intend to commit crime don't give a crap about carry laws and the only people who will follow those laws are no more likely to commit a crime without a permit than with one, then how do such laws 'prevent crime'?

I can just seen Mr. Lowlife now, saying, "Man, I'd really like to rob that liquor store that old dude runs. Unfortunately, to get my gat in there to shove it in that old dude's face, I'd have to carry it in public illegally. I might be willing to knock over the place and even kill old dude if he don't do what I say but risk the kind of heat that comes with carrying illegally? No way!"

Further, I can see how passing laws to restrict carry of firearms by those with a criminal record might be justified under the intention of preventing crime - and doing away with carry permit requirements would not negate those laws. The current law, however, seems to assume that anyone who wants to carry a legally owned firearm is looking to commit a crime and that only by receiving a permit can they be trusted.

You may be right, its more in how they interpret "with a view to prevent crime".

My interpetation is not their interpretation.

Oh and I was just pointing out their legal athority.

Can the state legislature prove that requiring otherwise law-abiding citizens to obtain a permit before carrying a handgun has a real, significant impact on preventing crime? If not, does doing so really fall within their expressed authority?

The problem here, IMO, is that they have been given license to more or less decide what their authority is. It may not be technically constitutional but that doesn't stop them from arresting and charging you for violating laws which they have no authority to pass - the fact that they have the power to arrest and jail you, constitutional or not, gives them authority and until and unless enough people say, "No, we won't allow that," it will continue to be that way. That applies to all levels of government and to many more areas than handgun carry regulation. I don't want to go to jail which is why I have a permit to carry. What would I do, however, if I felt that my life were truly in danger on a daily basis and I could not afford the time or expense required to obtain a legal carry permit? No comment.

Edited April 6, 2010 by JAB

[G27]

No, actually been there and done that and have bettered myself.

Others can do it too if they want too. I've lived in the projects when younger, struggled raising a family, just like everybody else. There not anything that was untrue in my statement, sometimes it is simply a matter of what matters to you.

Just saying, been there, done that, too. To say all poor folks as 'having cars and big screen TV's, welfare and foodstamps' is unfair to folks who haven't had the breaks you and I have - I know tons of poor folks who struggle to keep a roof over their heads and feed their families, often without some of the basics that we consider necessities, in order to get by. Characterizing them as lazy or careless isn't fair.

$200 is nothing to many of us nowadays, but for some folks it may as well be $20k or more. And the fact that they should have to 'save their money' in order to be able to legally protect themselves, as basic a right as there is, is a load of crap.

Congrats on pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps, but not everyone is able to do so. Not everyone who is poor is lazy, nor do all poor folks waste their money on luxuries.

[Hgunner]

Just saying, been there, done that, too. To say all poor folks as 'having cars and big screen TV's, welfare and foodstamps' is unfair to folks who haven't had the breaks you and I have - I know tons of poor folks who struggle to keep a roof over their heads and feed their families, often without some of the basics that we consider necessities, in order to get by. Characterizing them as lazy or careless isn't fair.

$200 is nothing to many of us nowadays, but for some folks it may as well be $20k or more. And the fact that they should have to 'save their money' in order to be able to legally protect themselves, as basic a right as there is, is a load of crap.

Congrats on pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps, but not everyone is able to do so. Not everyone who is poor is lazy, nor do all poor folks waste their money on luxuries.

I guess what we need is another welfare program to pay for peoples permits, or maybe we should see about changing the laws, I was simply pointing out the legilatures authority to enact the laws as they have.

Oh and by the , live in a project in the DC area, be a white man with a white wife and a white baby. You'll get motivated real damn fast to make a better life. Don't try and lecture me on being poor.

Edited April 6, 2010 by Hgunner

[G27]

I guess what we need is another welfare program to pay for peoples permits, or maybe we should see about changing the laws, I was simply pointing out the legilatures authority to enact the laws as they have.p

Sure, they have the authority, no problem. Doesn't mean the current fee schedule is right.

BTW, nice straw man you got there with the 'welfare' bit.

Oh and by the , live in a projest in the DC area, be a white man with a white wife and a white baby. You'll get motivated real damn fast to make a better life. Don't try and lecture me on being poor.

Oh, sorry! I didn't realize that your singular experience means that you are now able to paint entire groups of people with one incredibly broad brush. OK, you win, poor people all have big screens and cars and accept welfare, they are unable to carry only because they choose not to.

Thanks for enlightening us.

[Hgunner]

Sure, they have the authority, no problem. Doesn't mean the current fee schedule is right.

BTW, nice straw man you got there with the 'welfare' bit.

Oh, sorry! I didn't realize that your singular experience means that you are now able to paint entire groups of people with one incredibly broad brush. OK, you win, poor people all have big screens and cars and accept welfare, they are unable to carry only because they choose not to.

Thanks for enlightening us.

Have you ever been to a Mexico City slum? Have you seen a palistinian refuge camp up close. Have you been to South America and seen people living on trash heaps. We have the richest best taken care of poor in the whole wide world. Our poor would not be considered poor in most poor countries if not all poor countries.

[G27]

Have you ever been to a Mexico City slum? Have you seen a palistinian refuge camp up close. Have you been to South America and seen people living on trash heaps. We have the richest best taken care of poor in the whole wide world. Our poor would not be considered poor in most poor countries if not all poor countries.

I can't argue with you, you grew up in the projects in DC - you know the situation of all poor everywhere!

You're Poor-Man!

There's no way anyone in this country can be responsible AND be poor enough they cannot afford the $200, because you said so.

I see no reason to continue this discussion, Poor-Man has enlightened us all!

[Hgunner]

Well if it were me which it isn't I would be more worried as a poor man on how to get myself out of my current situation than aquiring a handgun permit and handgun that I could ill afford.

We just view things differently, I would try and do something about my poverty first.

I'm not saying the current law is right or just, change the laws if you don't agree with them.

Oh and I did not grow up in a DC area project, just had the unfortunate experince of living in one for awhile.

Edited April 6, 2010 by Hgunner

[Derek]

Carrying without a permit is only a Class C Misdemeanor in Tennessee. Conceal well and save up to pay a fine if ya get caught.

[Oh Shoot]

Carrying without a permit is only a Class C Misdemeanor in Tennessee. Conceal well and save up to pay a fine if ya get caught.

Class A 'meaner in public, which is almost everywhere you're likely to be caught except maybe in your car.

- OS

[Hgunner]

Class A 'meaner in public, which is almost everywhere you're likely to be caught except maybe in your car.

- OS

I thought it had been reclassified as a felony, good to know it has not.

[piper266]

I have to say I agree with most of you guys. We, as citizens, should never have to pay a fee to exercise the rights granted to us by the Constitution. However, I still say a class of some type should be mandated in order to ensure domestic safety...no different than obtaining a driver's license.

[Derek]

I thought it had been reclassified as a felony, good to know it has not.

I was under that impression as well. But I was chatting with a buddy last night who is a state rep...he told me its a $500 fine...no felony charge at all. Niiiice.

[Guest mustangdave]

IF this is really something you WANT/NEED...you will find a way to get the $$ for the fees and class...regardless. IMHO...you have to EARN it...not have it given to you. If it takes some effort to obtain...it will be all that much more worth it and you'll be less apt to let it expire or lapse

[Oh Shoot]

I was under that impression as well. But I was chatting with a buddy last night who is a state rep...he told me its a $500 fine...no felony charge at all. Niiiice.

You could just read the statute, and suggest to your rep that he do the same, as his info is flawed. Or perhaps he is talking about the current or proposed "carry in bars" amendment for carrying in a posted establishment, and only applies to HCP holders.

Subject under discussion is about carrying without a permit -- illegal carrying or possession of a weapon can be a class A, B, or C misdemeanor, which carry different levels of fine and/or jail time.

It's never a felony, even with repeat convictions.

- OS

Edited April 6, 2010 by OhShoot

[G27]

IF this is really something you WANT/NEED...you will find a way to get the $$ for the fees and class...regardless. IMHO...you have to EARN it...not have it given to you.

I sure am glad people don't feel this way about our other rights!

[Derek]

You could just read the statute, and suggest to your rep that he do the same, as his info is flawed. Or perhaps he is talking about the current or proposed "carry in bars" amendment for carrying in a posted establishment, and only applies to HCP holders.

Subject under discussion is about carrying without a permit -- illegal carrying or possession of a weapon can be a class A, B, or C misdemeanor, which carry different levels of fine and/or jail time.

It's never a felony, even with repeat convictions.

- OS

ah......so it is a class a mis. and not a class c? just curious..thanks!

for the record, its not "carry in bars" its restaurant carry. The law specifically mentions no carry is allowed in establishments that you must be over 21 to enter....just that you are allowed to carry in places that serve alcohol.

[Oh Shoot]

ah....

for the record, its not "carry in bars" its restaurant carry. The law specifically mentions no carry is allowed in establishments that you must be over 21 to enter....just that you are allowed to carry in places that serve alcohol.

Which is why I put it in quotes, used for brevity.

However, AFAIK and I could certainly be wrong, but, the HB3125 amendment under consideration in legislature does not say anything about the over 21 requirement you mention, so presumably, you CAN carry in a "bar".

Otherwise, we have the same problem under which the previous statute was judged to be unconstitutionally vague.

- OS

[Oh Shoot]

ah......so it is a class a mis. and not a class c? just curious..thanks!...

Again, I suggest you READ the statute.

It can be A, B, or C, depending on circumstances.

39-17-1307

http://michie.com/tennessee

- OS

[Guest That Guy]

Of course it is a barrier to entry. I would not want it any other way, with the exception of unlicensed open carry. Even that, however, is risky.

I am in favor of mandatory firearms training. I would prefer to see it integrated in school curriculum and transition in to a two year minimum military service requirement for able-bodied citizens.

But basically, if you can't afford $200 you probably don't have a great job. In turn, that speaks about your intellect. I don't want morons or thugs legally packin'.

[sigmtnman]

Lots of folks around here support taxes for the privilege of having a right. Wonder what the founding fathers would have thought about that.

Some even think "paying" the tax, is earning a right.

Wow.

[Hgunner]

Lots of folks around here support taxes for the privilege of having a right. Wonder what the founding fathers would have thought about that.

Some even think "paying" the tax, is earning a right.

Wow.

Again, this is what the Tennesssee State Constitution says, the United States Constitution does not apply in this instance.

I am not saying that I support this position, however it is the law of the land of Tennessee.

Tennessee State Constitution

§ 26. Weapons; right to bear arms

That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.

Therefore carrying a gun in Tennessee is a privilege and not a right, nobodies rights are being violated.

Change the Constitution if you don't like the law.

[Hgunner]

Of course it is a barrier to entry. I would not want it any other way, with the exception of unlicensed open carry. Even that, however, is risky.

I am in favor of mandatory firearms training. I would prefer to see it integrated in school curriculum and transition in to a two year minimum military service requirement for able-bodied citizens.

But basically, if you can't afford $200 you probably don't have a great job. In turn, that speaks about your intellect. I don't want morons or thugs legally packin'.

Man be careful crimsonaudio came after me for say'in a lot less......

Edited April 6, 2010 by Hgunner

[TMMT]

Again, this is what the Tennesssee State Constitution says, the United States Constitution does not apply in this instance.

[/b]

Really, wow!

Sounds exactly the same as what Mayor Daley use to say about Chicago. Same others said in DC, in New York, California, Seattle...