Tennessee Senate Overrides Restaurant Carry Veto

[Fallguy]

See, you're proving my point. You're getting angry at just the thought of it. If this jackass attorney's office gets hundreds of phone calls from servers asking (or better yet, demanding) him to back off because they don't support what he's doing, it might make a difference?

I haven't seen anyone with another idea, much less a better one.

Just waiting around to see what happens and taking it up the ass again

doesn't sound appealing.

Guess I didn't realize that an attorney getting calls from people (that aren't his clients) telling him they don't like what he is doing (because lawyers really like being popular) could make him change his mind, go against his clients wishes or advise his clients to withdraw their suit.

[Guest HexHead]

Guess I didn't realize that an attorney getting calls from people (that aren't his clients) telling him they don't like what he is doing (because lawyers really like being popular) could make him change his mind, go against his clients wishes or advise his clients to withdraw their suit.

Okay, so what have you got?

[VolunteerGuns]

Okay, so what have you got?

Thats the $10,000 question. Ideas?

[redstategunnut]

How about win the lawsuit on its merits and have the plaintiffs pay all the costs for it?

[Fallguy]

Okay, so what have you got?

If you mean to stop the suit from being filed....nothing, because I don't think anything will stop them from filing it.

I have every bit of confidence it will be thrown out though when it gets to a hearing.

If it is not though, then helping to prove that their case has no merit would be more helpful I think.

Get stats from the 40+ states that allow it already, give that to the AG (not that he'd take it), but also to the media, to the servers. Be at the hearings giving out that infomation.

Call your local talk radio station.

There may be other ideas, but those are some that come to mind...if we even get that far.

[Guest HexHead]

If you mean to stop the suit from being filed....nothing, because I don't think anything will stop them from filing it.

I have every bit of confidence it will be thrown out though when it gets to a hearing.

While, granted that's what Bonneyman did last time when they brought up this same issue, who's to say she'll do it again, or that she'll even be hearing the case this time around? We had every confidence she'd throw out the "vagueness" issue last time too. IIRC, I was the only one really concerned about the 2nd hearing in November to take up that issue, what with them bringing in Will Cheek to replace Dread etc. It was like a big yawn around here until the actual event... was over.

If it is not though, then helping to prove that their case has no merit would be more helpful I think.

How's that going to work?

Get stats from the 40+ states that allow it already, give that to the AG (not that he'd take it), but also to the media, to the servers. Be at the hearings giving out that infomation.

The AG is NOT on our side. Remember, I called the AG's office a couple of weeks ago to ask the status of the appeal? I was told that someone in the office had been assigned but that's as far as it's gotten. They're doing nothing with it. They punted the ball during the hearing last time too.

The Media? Are you referring to the newspapers that hate us, or the TV stations that hate us? Hell, even Fox News made a mockery of our "guns in bars" bill last year. The servers won't do **** unless we force their hand. Just like most restaurant owners that didn't post last year didn't come out publicly in support of us either, not even to state Rayburn didn't speak for them. And since you were at the hearings last year, you know we won't be allowed to show support there.

Call your local talk radio station.

Calling Steve Gill or Phil Valentine is just preaching to the choir.

There may be other ideas, but those are some that come to mind...if we even get that far.

I'm all ears. But this shouldn't be a dialogue just between the two of us. Surely the collective wisdom of TGO can come up with something better than I did. Or maybe not?

[strickj]

*I've skipped over a lot of this cluster**** so I don't know if this has been said or not...

Leave them a note to contact attorney Smith's office for their tip.

That was different. That was to boycott the restaurants for not supporting us.

This time, it's more targeted, not just an insignificant drop in business. The waitstaff will feel the pain more and be angrier. Especially on an expensive tab. Not just some piss ant $8 lunch. They will take out their frustration on the target we so happily obliged them with.

HAHAHAHAHA. I'm waiting for his "thug tactics, part 2" thread.

Hex, the only thing not tipping is going to do is make a bunch of waitresses rally against people with permits.

Money talks. If you want the waitress' to rally behind us, then you need to tip big.

Let them know people with permits are good people who are willing to support them, if they support us.

[Fallguy]

While, granted that's what Bonneyman did last time when they brought up this same issue, who's to say she'll do it again, or that she'll even be hearing the case this time around? We had every confidence she'd throw out the "vagueness" issue last time too. IIRC, I was the only one really concerned about the 2nd hearing in November to take up that issue, what with them bringing in Will Cheek to replace Dread etc. It was like a big yawn around here until the actual event... was over.

She more or less set a precedent, right? What has changed in the world to make things any different.

Without going back and looking up, because maybe I didn't post it either, but I too was concerned about the vaguness. I could tell from siting in the courtroom that day she was very interested in that argument. In fact I think if they would have filed their suit on that basis, she would have ruled void that day.

But at least of now, vaguness is not the issue.

How's that going to work?

Well show their case has not merit, it is thrown out or they are ruled against.

The AG is NOT on our side. Remember, I called the AG's office a couple of weeks ago to ask the status of the appeal? I was told that someone in the office had been assigned but that's as far as it's gotten. They're doing nothing with it. They punted the ball during the hearing last time too.

Well on our side or not, if they challenge the law he is the one that defends it. That is not to say you can give help or info directily, but I'm sure the TFA, NRA and others will be in communication with them...so anything you can do to help them would be good.

The Media? Are you referring to the newspapers that hate us, or the TV stations that hate us? Hell, even Fox News made a mockery of our "guns in bars" bill last year. The servers won't do **** unless we force their hand. Just like most restaurant owners that didn't post last year didn't come out publicly in support of us either, not even to state Rayburn didn't speak for them. And since you were at the hearings last year, you know we won't be allowed to show support there.

Letters to the editor etc.... Seems like Nikki got a favorable interview or two last year. Of course you can't do anything in the courtroom, but there were plenty reporters just outside of it and out front of the courthouse as well as other interested people. But I think the TGO, TFA and other pro-gun people that were there did show support just by being there.

Calling Steve Gill or Phil Valentine is just preaching to the choir.

Preach loud enoung and maybe those outside the chruch will here you and come in....

I'm all ears. But this shouldn't be a dialogue just between the two of us. Surely the collective wisdom of TGO can come up with something better than I did. Or maybe not?

I don't have all the answers either.

[Guest HexHead]

*I've skipped over a lot of this cluster**** so I don't know if this has been said or not...

Hex, the only thing not tipping is going to do is make a bunch of waitresses rally against people with permits.

Money talks. If you want the waitress' to rally behind us, then you need to tip big.

Let them know people with permits are good people who are willing to support them, if they support us.

Again, I've got to disagree.Rewarding them is hardly a call to action. They won't even notice a difference from what would just be a usual day.

I can't believe what a bunch of ******* you guys are. I'm now convinced that when the 0bamites come around to confiscate your guns, you really will say some BS about a "boating accident" instead of standing up for yourselves.

[Fallguy]

Again, I've got to disagree.Rewarding them is hardly a call to action. They won't even notice a difference from what would just be a usual day.

I can't believe what a bunch of ******* you guys are. I'm now convinced that when the 0bamites come around to confiscate your guns, you really will say some BS about a "boating accident" instead of standing up for yourselves.

If we are, you are.....at least based on you logic.

Because your whole point is that any one member of a group is the same as the whole of the group, right?

That should be treated and punished the same, even if they aren't involved in whatever is going on.

So as a member of TGO and a gun owner...you just a big of a ***** as the rest of us in this bunch....

[eapking]

Probably need to ask the NRA what if anything can be done from a legal standpoint to shut up the Rayburn allies.

[Guest HexHead]

She more or less set a precedent, right? What has changed in the world to make things any different.

Had she made a ruling on it in the form of a decision, that would have been a precedent. All she did was say she wasn't going to hear that argument.

Without going back and looking up, because maybe I didn't post it either, but I too was concerned about the vaguness. I could tell from siting in the courtroom that day she was very interested in that argument. In fact I think if they would have filed their suit on that basis, she would have ruled void that day.

When I rang the alarm about Will Cheek coming on board the plaintiffs legal team, and who he was, that thread languished for quite a while.

Well show their case has not merit, it is thrown out or they are ruled against.

How do you propose we show that? They are filing this complaint based on emotion, not fact. They "feel" they are in danger.

Well on our side or not, if they challenge the law he is the one that defends it. That is not to say you can give help or info directily, but I'm sure the TFA, NRA and others will be in communication with them...so anything you can do to help them would be good.

Yeah, that sure worked out well the last time didn't it? The AG sure put on a robust defense for us. HAHAHAHAHA

And the NRA was completely MIA during the court proceedings. They were less than worthless. Just like they were during the passing of this bill as far as the sign amendment was concerned.

Letters to the editor etc.... Seems like Nikki got a favorable interview or two last year. Of course you can't do anything in the courtroom, but there were plenty reporters just outside of it and out front of the courthouse as well as other interested people. But I think the TGO, TFA and other pro-gun people that were there did show support just by being there.

Nikki got favorable press because she had a compelling story, told it well and quite frankly, she's easy on the eyes. But none of that support you mention helped our cause with Bonneyman now, did it? And did all that "favorable press" as you call it make the road to where we are today any easier?

Preach loud enoung and maybe those outside the chruch will here you and come in....

Or you can get in their face and make them listen. The time for niceties is long past.

[Guest HexHead]

Probably need to ask the NRA what if anything can be done from a legal standpoint to shut up the Rayburn allies.

The NRA won't get involved in local litigation. They were useless last year and will be again. The NRA-ILA only gets involved in the political/legislative process.

I'm a life member and I support them for their "big picture" work, but that doesn't mean I agree with a lot of what they do. Or don't do.

[Guest HexHead]

If we are, you are.....at least based on you logic.

Because your whole point is that any one member of a group is the same as the whole of the group, right?

That should be treated and punished the same, even if they aren't involved in whatever is going on.

So as a member of TGO and a gun owner...you just a big of a ***** as the rest of us in this bunch....

HAHAHAHA... touche.

[Fallguy]

Had she made a ruling on it in the form of a decision, that would have been a precedent. All she did was say she wasn't going to hear that argument.

Well if she couldn't hear it before, how could she now...or anyone esle in the same court?

How do you propose we show that? They are filing this complaint based on emotion, not fact. They "feel" they are in danger.

While I won't say there is no emotion in court ruilings, they are supposed to be based primarily on the facts, which I think are more than on our side.

Nikki got favorable press because she had a compelling story, told it well and quite frankly, she's easy on the eyes. But none of that support you mention helped our cause with Bonneyman now, did it? And did all that "favorable press" as you call it make the road to where we are today any easier?

I'm just saying it's worth a try. Much better than negative press based on any of us doing anything stupid anyway.

Or you can get in their face and make them listen. The time for niceties is long past.

I have no problem with getting in their face, but sometimes the louder you yell the less anyone listens. That is not to say just shut up, you just don't alway have to holler and scream and wave your arms around.

But when you go get in the face of somone, it should be the person opposed to you, not someone that just happens to have the same job as someone opposed to you.

[strickj]

Again, I've got to disagree.Rewarding them is hardly a call to action. They won't even notice a difference from what would just be a usual day.

I can't believe what a bunch of ******* you guys are. I'm now convinced that when the 0bamites come around to confiscate your guns, you really will say some BS about a "boating accident" instead of standing up for yourselves.

I can tell you've never worked for tips!

People who work off of tips, always remember two types.

Those who don't tip, and those that tip well.

If you chose not to tip, and tell them why you're not tipping, they will say, "hey, **** these permit carriers". "They're rude, and don't even tip, so why should I support them?" They will not want us returning to their restaurant.

If you tip well, they will say, "hey, those gun carriers are the nicest group of people I have ever waited on!".

With that, they will support us because we tip better then the other groups, and will wish us to return to their restaurant.

Ever heard the phrase "catch more flies with honey"?

It has absolutely nothing to do with being a *****.

It has everything to do with intelligence and knowing how those you're wanting to go after will react.

strickj- former tip wager.

[Guest HexHead]

Well if she couldn't hear it before, how could she now...or anyone esle in the same court?

There's a difference between couldn't and wouldn't. Before she wouldn't.

[Guest HexHead]

I can tell you've never worked for tips!

People who work off of tips, always remember two types.

Those who don't tip, and those that tip well.

If you chose not to tip, and tell them why you're not tipping, they will say, "hey, **** these permit carriers". "They're rude, and don't even tip, so why should I support them?" They will not want us returning to their restaurant.

If you tip well, they will say, "hey, those gun carriers are the nicest group of people I have ever waited on!".

With that, they will support us because we tip better then the other groups, and will wish us to return to their restaurant.

Ever heard the phrase "catch more flies with honey"?

It has absolutely nothing to do with being a *****.

It has everything to do with intelligence and knowing how those you're wanting to go after will react.

strickj- former tip wager.

Actually I have. Drove a cab in NYC at night years ago. You're obviously missing the point entirely. I couldn't care less if they "wish us to return to their restaurant", I want them mad as hell at the ******* lawyer that's pissing us off enough to make them the scapegoat.

[strickj]

Actually I have. Drove a cab in NYC at night years ago. You're obviously missing the point entirely. I couldn't care less if they "wish us to return to their restaurant", I want them mad as hell at the ******* lawyer that's pissing us off enough to make them the scapegoat.

Yes, they will be mad, but not at some lawyer they have never met or at some bill they have never heard of.

They will be mad at you.

Other then that, it's just wrong to go after those who have nothing to do with any of this.

I wouldn't take money out of a Kangaroo's employee's pocket because I got water in my gas....

[Fallguy]

Actually I have. Drove a cab in NYC at night years ago. You're obviously missing the point entirely. I couldn't care less if they "wish us to return to their restaurant", I want them mad as hell at the ******* lawyer that's pissing us off enough to make them the scapegoat.

But again...them who?

It's not a class action suit, it's not some server's union that is filing the suit. It is a small group of individuals.

Those who filed the suit aren't going to be influenced by others that happen to have the same job as them just because they are getting grief from HCP holders. Their lawyer is for sure not.

I'd be willing to bet that several servers are already on our side.

It's not your method I'm disputing per se and for sure not your spirit, it's just the idea of targeting all of a group for the actions of some. Especially when the group as a whole has no direct control or influence over the some.

[GKar]

...it's just the idea of targeting all of a group for the actions of some. Especially when the group as a whole has no direct control or influence over the some.

Seems gun owners have spent a lot of energy, time and words trying to avoid being the victim/target of this exact tact. Is it not just a bit disingenuous to then turn and employ the very tact one decries as otherwise unfair? To do so ultimately seems likely to undermine many/most of the gains we're trying to make in the court of public opinion/credibility. And that is a battle we desperately need to win: any gains there we make erode what persuasive influence the oppostion may have, while failing to do so continues to empower the opposition and embolden both their arguments and their resolve.

[Guest nashvegas]

Talk about putting the cart before the horse.... Jeeeeezz!@!

[Guest (BH)]

Seems gun owners have spent a lot of energy, time and words trying to avoid being the victim/target of this exact tact. Is it not just a bit disingenuous to then turn and employ the very tact one decries as otherwise unfair? To do so ultimately seems likely to undermine many/most of the gains we're trying to make in the court of public opinion/credibility. And that is a battle we desperately need to win: any gains there we make erode what persuasive influence the oppostion may have, while failing to do so continues to empower the opposition and embolden both their arguments and their resolve.

Great point, Gkar.

[Wingshooter]

Instead of withholding the tip, what about getting the signatures of servers on a petion showing that they do not agree with the claim of workplace safety. Then, it could be presented in an organized fashon in our defense. Personally, I am a little uneasy about drawing too much attention to this matter within the restaurants in the first place, but that might be more effective than just skipping out on the tip. Hopefully, this won't even be an issue...

[Guest HexHead]

Instead of withholding the tip, what about getting the signatures of servers on a petion showing that they do not agree with the claim of workplace safety. Then, it could be presented in an organized fashon in our defense. Personally, I am a little uneasy about drawing too much attention to this matter within the restaurants in the first place, but that might be more effective than just skipping out on the tip. Hopefully, this won't even be an issue...

Good luck getting a group of people that don't carry to sign a petition supporting people that do. Sometimes you guys really crack me up with your naivety or wide eyed innocence. Does our opposition give a crap about attracting too much attention? We are where we are because they don't. I'm tired of sitting back and just letting **** happen to us.

I couldn't agree more with your last line. I hope to he'll we DON'T need to do what I'm suggesting. But given this douche bag attorney's track record on this ****, the only way it won't be an issue is if the House fails to override the veto. I'm afraid the next time he gets to Chancery Court, it'll be just like last time and the fix will be in.

You know, I ran this past my wife on the way to lunch today. Now keep in mind she rarely sees my side on stuff like this. Even she thought it was a great idea.