New Bill introduced proposing CCW in establishment serving liquor

[mdmoseley]

email back from Janis:

This bill will be in the Criminal Practice and Procedure Subcommittee next Wed. at noon.

Janis Sontany

[dunndw]

The covered it on WKRN @ 6 tonight. SerpASS and several bar owners all spouting the same "they don't mix" when asked about guns and booze. The bright spot of the "coverage' was when they interviewed the sponsor and he called the open letter the opponents sent the speaker of the house "misleading" and said on camera they left out the part where the gun carrier can't even consume one drop of booze

[analog_kidd]

If you call or email them, and you don't live in their district, do they just blow you off, or do they actually listen?

[strickj]

As far as I know you must include your name,and street addr in the email or it just gets deleted

[waynesan]

If you are calling a committee member who is voting on something that affects the whole state, at least for that moment they are my rep regardless of where I live. Whether they just "blow it off" I couldn't say. But I will have to say when I've called other reps out of my district their staffs have taken my information just as though I lived in their district. I even had a representative call me personally last week on one of the bills to tell me what was going on and he knew I was not one of his constituants.

[waynesan]

mdmoseley, you are correct with Sontany's reply. I just checked the schedule for next week and there are three bills to be acted on next Wednesday the 19th.

HB0702 Allows person who has permit to carry a handgun to carry gun in place where alcohol is served for consumption on premises if person is not consuming alcohol or is not otherwise prohibited by posting provisions.

HB3667 Allows any resident, who has a valid handgun carry permit, to possess his or her handgun while within the boundaries of any state park.

HB3014 Authorizes full-time faculty and staff at public schools, colleges, and universities in Tennessee to carry handguns if not otherwise prohibited by law.

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

mdmoseley, you are correct with Sontany's reply. I just checked the schedule for next week and there are three bills to be acted on next Wednesday the 19th.

HB0702 Allows person who has permit to carry a handgun to carry gun in place where alcohol is served for consumption on premises if person is not consuming alcohol or is not otherwise prohibited by posting provisions.

HB3667 Allows any resident, who has a valid handgun carry permit, to possess his or her handgun while within the boundaries of any state park.

HB3014 Authorizes full-time faculty and staff at public schools, colleges, and universities in Tennessee to carry handguns if not otherwise prohibited by law.

I just caught that too. Now might be a good time to write/call the House members that are on the Criminal practice and procedures subcommittee and let them know how we feel about these bills. For those interested, you can watch the CP&P session live via streaming video on the web by going to http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/ and then clicking on "House" and "Video Streaming" on the left side.

[Guest GUTTERbOY]

I have never contacted one of my reps regarding something like this, but it's high time I stopped being complacent and started taking an active role in changing things. I hope that others will follow suit, and we can influence this in the right direction.

[Guest canynracer]

I did it...its actually kida fun...when they respond...

[mdmoseley]

Just got this back from Judd Matheny:

We hear the bill in subcommittee on the 19th and I hope we can get it out. I wholeheartedly support it. There may be an amendment brought forward that disallows carrying a firearm in 21 and over only establishments, but you may carry in restaurants that serve alcohol and admit those under 21 if you are not drinking. I can support this forward progress also if we can't get the bill forward in any other way. As far s getting to the House Floor, where it will pass, it could be from a few weeks minimum to the first week of May.

Judd Matheny

Have heard back from 3 of the 6. Janis as expected didn't say much. The other two said they fully support it. Hopefully they can get it out to the floor for a vote by April.

[waynesan]

I called everyone on the sub-committee today. From what I can tell there are four definite votes for passage. Briley and Sontany are probably against but I called them anyway. If they pass next week my understanding is they go before the Judiciary Committee. If they can pass through there without any amendments they can be sent to the floor for a vote. If they are amended, they have to go to another committee to see what the amendments would cost the state to implement if anything. If they pass through that one then they're off to the floor for a vote by the full house.

Briley killed the Carry in Parks Bill last session by adding that stupid sign amendment. I hope we can avoid anything like that this time.

[Fallguy]

Hmmmm..well with 4 yes votes, that sounds like enough to pass even if Naifeh was to sit in and vote.

Although I'd rather not see the 21 year old amendment added, I would rather see that then the bill not pass at all.

On the parks bill....the sign thing is just the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. But a good way to kill it without looking anti.

[Guest canynracer]

I am not really worried about the 21 thing....baby steps, once they see that us responsible gun owners can carry in a resturaunt that serves without having blood fill the streets, they will feel all warm and fuzzy, then we can push for the 21 thing next year.... I just want SOMETHING...I mean, my Mom is here from CA, we couldnt go to a nice resturaunt because of the alchohol thing....so we ended up in CiCi's...so for me, I will take what we can get...baby steps...lol

[Guest GUTTERbOY]

I am not really worried about the 21 thing....baby steps, once they see that us responsible gun owners can carry in a resturaunt that serves without having blood fill the streets, they will feel all warm and fuzzy, then we can push for the 21 thing next year.... I just want SOMETHING...I mean, my Mom is here from CA, we couldnt go to a nice resturaunt because of the alchohol thing....so we ended up in CiCi's...so for me, I will take what we can get...baby steps...lol

It's not the nice restaurants that bother me really, it's the casual lunch places that sell beer. I avoid fast food, and am a big fan of local burrito places like Moe's and Blue Coast, but they both sell beer... so no carrying there. And I eat at places like that nearly every day.

Granted, I don't have my TN HCP yet, so it's nothing more than an academic inconvenience now, but it'd be nice for this to get changed by the time I'm able to start packing.

[Guest Jamie]

Just saw WSMV Ch. 4's report on HB0702 this evening. And they conveniently left out the part about a CCW carrier not being able to drink while in any establishment that sells alcohol.

So, I sent them the little note below:

"Saw your report on the Tn bill that's up for vote, HB0702, which would allow people with handgun carry permits to carry in businesses that sell alcohol by the drink.

It's too bad you didn't have the integrity report the WHOLE story - that the bill wouldn't allow anyone carrying a firearm to drink any alcohol while armed - as WKRN News 2 did when they reported on the story yesterday.

I've watch WSMV's news for a long time now, but if this is an example of how your reporting is going to go, it looks like it's time for me to change the channel."

I tried to keep it brief, since it's obvious that they have a short attention span these days, and can't deal with a subject in it's entirety.

J.

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

Just saw WSMV Ch. 4's report on HB0702 this evening. And they conveniently left out the part about a CCW carrier not being able to drink while in any establishment that sells alcohol.

So, I sent them the little note below:

"Saw your report on the Tn bill that's up for vote, HB0702, which would allow people with handgun carry permits to carry in businesses that sell alcohol by the drink.

It's too bad you didn't have the integrity report the WHOLE story - that the bill wouldn't allow anyone carrying a firearm to drink any alcohol while armed - as WKRN News 2 did when they reported on the story yesterday.

I've watch WSMV's news for a long time now, but if this is an example of how your reporting is going to go, it looks like it's time for me to change the channel."

I tried to keep it brief, since it's obvious that they have a short attention span these days, and can't deal with a subject in it's entirety.

J.

Most news outlets also fail to mention that there is already legislation (39-17-1321 of the TN code) that makes it illegal to drink alchohol while in possesion of a firearm.

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD></TD><TD>39-17-1321. Possession of handgun while under influence — Penalty. —

</TD><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3 height=12></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><!-- Text -->

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD rowSpan=5></TD><TD colSpan=3 height=12></TD><TD rowSpan=5></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3></TD></TR><TR><TD></TD><TD>(a) Notwithstanding whether a person has a permit issued pursuant to § 39-17-1315 or § 39-17-1351, it is an offense for a person to possess a handgun while under the influence of alcohol or any controlled substance.

</TD><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3 height=1></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD rowSpan=5></TD><TD colSpan=3 height=12></TD><TD rowSpan=5></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3></TD></TR><TR><TD></TD><TD>( A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

</TD><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3 height=1></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><!-- History -->

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>[Acts 1994, ch. 943, § 10; 1997, ch. 476, § 4.]

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

I personally would be fine with the 21&older amendment. But I don't drink alcohol at all and I haven't found myself going into a regular bar in many years. However, I would hope that adding that amendment would not cause the bill to be held up or fail all together.

[Marswolf]

I am not really worried about the 21 thing....baby steps

It's what Lyndon Johnson called half-a-loaf.. You get what you can and then go for the rest of it.

[Guest Jamie]

Most news outlets also fail to mention that there is already legislation (39-17-1321 of the TN code) that makes it illegal to drink alchohol while in possesion of a firearm.

That's not entirely correct. Technically, you can have a drink and still carry, under the law you quote, so long as you don't cross the legal limit. ( And thereby be "Under the influence". )

The new bill, if I understand correctly, would make it illegal to consume any alcohol while carrying in an establishment that sells it.

It might sound like splitting hairs, but it would make a world of difference in court.

J.

Edited March 14, 2008 by Jamie

[Fallguy]

That's not entirely correct. Technically, you can have a drink and still carry, under the law you quote, so long as you don't cross the legal limit. ( And thereby be "Under the influence". )

The new bill, if I understand correctly, would make it illegal to consume any alcohol while carrying in an establishment that sells it.

It might sound like splitting hairs, but it would make a world of difference in court.

J.

I have to agree, because the law that covers off-duty LEO carry T.C.A. 39-17-1350 makes a distinction between "consuming" and "under the influence" {part ©(2)} so it would seem the law does not see them as the same thing. However, the off-duty LEO law does not allow them to consume, period, while armed, no matter where they are. So...not sure how many LEO's would think it is ok for you to have drink armed, when they can't. Especially since without a BAC, under the influence is up to the discretion of the officer.

[Guest Jamie]

Especially since without a BAC, under the influence is up to the discretion of the officer.

Uh, no, that is not correct.

If a person fails a Field Sobriety test or a Breathalizer test, then they can request a blood test and one must be given. ( Some asthma inhalers can cause a breathalizer to show a BAC that's higher than it really is. A breathalizer is also no good if the person belches or vomits right before it's administered.)

The only time a person is assumed guilty is if they refuse to comply with testing. In that case, they violate the implied consent laws.

55-10-406. Tests for alcoholic or drug content of blood — Implied consent — Administration — Liability — Refusal to submit to test — Suspension of license — Fine — Mandatory jail or workhouse sentence — Notice — Hearing — Use of analysis as later evidence. —

(a) (1) Any person who drives a motor vehicle in this state is deemed to have given consent to a test or tests for the purpose of determining the alcoholic content of that person's blood, a test or tests for the purpose of determining the drug content of such person's blood, or both such tests. However, no such test or tests may be administered pursuant to this section, unless conducted at the direction of a law enforcement officer having reasonable grounds to believe such person was driving while under the influence of alcohol, a drug, any other intoxicant or any combination of alcohol, drugs, or other intoxicants as prohibited by § 55-10-401, or was violating the provisions of §§ 39-13-106, 39-13-213(a)(2) or 39-13-218. For the results of such test or tests to be admissible as evidence, it must first be established that all tests administered were administered to the person within two (2) hours following such person's arrest or initial detention.

55-10-407. Tests for alcoholic or drug content of blood — Admissibility — Failure to request test. —

(a) Upon the trial of any person charged with a violation of this chapter, the results of any test or tests conducted on the person so charged shall be admissible in evidence in a criminal proceeding.

( Failure of a law enforcement officer to request the administering of a test or tests shall likewise be admissible in evidence in a criminal proceeding.

[Acts 1969, ch. 292, § 3; 1970, ch. 427, § 4; T.C.A., § 59-1046; Acts 2005, ch. 483, §§ 3, 4.]

I know a lot of cops, but not the first one that would be willing to walk into court with a a DUI case that they didn't follow every possible rule or procedure regarding testing. They know if they do the case will most likely be thrown out, and also invite lawsuits.

55-10-408. Tests for alcoholic or drug content of blood — Presumptions of intoxication and impairment. —

For the purpose of proving a violation of § 55-10-401(a)(1), evidence that there was, at the time alleged, eight-hundredths of one percent (.08%) or more by weight of alcohol in the defendant's blood shall create a presumption that the defendant's ability to drive was sufficiently impaired thereby to constitute a violation of § 55-10-401(a)(1).

[Acts 1969, ch. 292, § 4; 1970, ch. 427, § 5; T.C.A., § 59-1047; Acts 1994, ch. 946, § 1; 1995, ch. 517, § 1; 1996, ch. 915, §§ 2, 3; 2002, ch. 855, § 9.]

DUI is not one of the laws that fall under the heading of "Officer's Discretion".

J.

Edited March 15, 2008 by Jamie

[saintsfanbrian]

Damn it feels good to have a lawyer around.

[analog_kidd]

I'm curious about the law restricting off-duty LEO's from carrying in a alchohol-serving restaurant. If they are eating lunch in a restaurant of this type, are they required to disarm before coming in? I wasn't sure if cops are "on duty" all day long or if they take a lunch hour like the rest of us.

If they are breaking the law, would it be better or worse for our side to make an issue of it?

[Guest Jamie]

Damn it feels good to have a lawyer around.

I'm not an attorney... I've just had to sit and watch/listen to a bunch of 'em try to get people out of DUI convictions. Quite successfully, in some instances.

One of the locals here has 21 counts of "First-offense DUI" on his record.

To me, that's sort of like saying a person that's had sex 20 times is still a virgin. But apparently the courts don't see it that way.

J.

Edited March 15, 2008 by Jamie

[Fallguy]

T.C.A. 39-17-310 Public intoxication. —

(a)A person commits the offense of public intoxication who appears in a public place under the influence of a controlled substance or any other intoxicating substance to the degree that:

(1)

The offender may be endangered;

(2)

There is endangerment to other persons or property; or

(3)

The offender unreasonably annoys people in the vicinity.

( A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor.

In my days of working at the jail, I have NEVER seen a BAC test given for Public Intox.

I'm curious about the law restricting off-duty LEO's from carrying in a alchohol-serving restaurant. If they are eating lunch in a restaurant of this type, are they required to disarm before coming in? I wasn't sure if cops are "on duty" all day long or if they take a lunch hour like the rest of us.

If they are breaking the law, would it be better or worse for our side to make an issue of it?

It doesn't say they have to be "on duty" to carry in there, but "engaged in the actual discharge of their duty" such as taking a theft report etc... Lunch does not qualify. However...I doubt making something of it would really accomplish anything.