New Bill introduced proposing CCW in establishment serving liquor

[Guest canynracer]

All in all, you have to be a moron to support gun control/

I control my gun very well...I dont THINK i am a moron...hehehehehehehehehehe

[Guest canynracer]

Bill is not dead yet... they (Jimmy, et al) decided to give it some special attention in a couple weeks, to prolong the misery. It looks pretty bleak at the moment, aside from the chance that the speaker somehow won't make it to the session on 4/2.

ok thanks!! I read this:

*********************************

House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh made an unusual visit Wednesday to a subcommittee hearing to cast votes that killed several handgun bills, including one that would have allowed diners to carry guns into restaurants.

Naifeh, who can cast votes in any House committee or subcommittee of his choosing, voted in three roll call votes that helped defeat bills in the Criminal Practice Subcommittee, as well as in a voice vote that defeated a fourth bill.

The votes killed a bill that would have permitted faculty and staff at public schools to carry handguns, one that would have allowed handguns in state parks and one that would have allowed people voluntarily committed to mental hospitals to get handgun licenses.

The fourth bill would have allowed guns in restaurants. The sponsor, Rep. Curry Todd, a Collierville Republican, said he was disappointed the bill died, and promised to bring it back next year. A similar bill, which has passed in the Senate and was recently the subject of a humorous spot on a late night comedy show, was deferred for two weeks. After the bills were voted down, Republicans criticized Naifeh, D-Covington, in a press release, saying that the committee was "stacked" for the vote and accusing him of "brazenly political efforts to scuttle commonsense rights for gun owners."

"I am disappointed that the Democratic leadership continually eats away at our most basic rights," House Republican Caucus Chairman Glen Casada, R-College Grove, said in the statement.

Addison Pate, the spokesman for the House Democrats, responded that "good legislation passes, bad legislation fails, regardless of the partisan side that the sponsor may be on."

Two other bills — one that would make applications for handgun carry permits confidential, the other that would make it a felony offense to publish carry permit information — passed a Senate committee Wednesday and are headed to floor votes. The House versions were delayed two weeks in subcommittees.

*******************************************

and got lost.....so which one was the one about resturants that got shot down?

[Guest clutepc]

I read the same thing, I thought it was dead as well..

Naifeh's votes help kill gun bills

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080320/NEWS0201/803200389/1009/NEWS02

Edited March 21, 2008 by clutepc

[Guest GUTTERbOY]

ok thanks!! I read this:

*********************************

House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh made an unusual visit Wednesday to a subcommittee hearing to cast votes that killed several handgun bills, including one that would have allowed diners to carry guns into restaurants.

Naifeh, who can cast votes in any House committee or subcommittee of his choosing, voted in three roll call votes that helped defeat bills in the Criminal Practice Subcommittee, as well as in a voice vote that defeated a fourth bill.

The votes killed a bill that would have permitted faculty and staff at public schools to carry handguns, one that would have allowed handguns in state parks and one that would have allowed people voluntarily committed to mental hospitals to get handgun licenses.

The fourth bill would have allowed guns in restaurants. The sponsor, Rep. Curry Todd, a Collierville Republican, said he was disappointed the bill died, and promised to bring it back next year. A similar bill, which has passed in the Senate and was recently the subject of a humorous spot on a late night comedy show, was deferred for two weeks. After the bills were voted down, Republicans criticized Naifeh, D-Covington, in a press release, saying that the committee was "stacked" for the vote and accusing him of "brazenly political efforts to scuttle commonsense rights for gun owners."

"I am disappointed that the Democratic leadership continually eats away at our most basic rights," House Republican Caucus Chairman Glen Casada, R-College Grove, said in the statement.

Addison Pate, the spokesman for the House Democrats, responded that "good legislation passes, bad legislation fails, regardless of the partisan side that the sponsor may be on."

Two other bills — one that would make applications for handgun carry permits confidential, the other that would make it a felony offense to publish carry permit information — passed a Senate committee Wednesday and are headed to floor votes. The House versions were delayed two weeks in subcommittees.

*******************************************

and got lost.....so which one was the one about resturants that got shot down?

There were actually two similar bills regarding restaurant carry. HB410 was the one that was killed; the only real substantive difference between it and 702 was that 410 still restricted carry in a place that made less than 60% from food sales. (ie bars) 702 was deferred until 4/2.

If you look on the calendar, there were a lot of bills that were quite similar in this way...

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

what gets me these idiots in nashville are so worried that if this bill pass we will all go out to dinner and get drunk and start shooting every thing in sight. do they not know that we all eat dinner at home and if we wanted we can get drunk there and go out and shoot up the town whats the differences . and please show me one time this has happened

[molonlabetn]

There were actually two similar bills regarding restaurant carry. HB410 was the one that was killed; the only real substantive difference between it and 702 was that 410 still restricted carry in a place that made less than 60% from food sales. (ie bars) 702 was deferred until 4/2.

If you look on the calendar, there were a lot of bills that were quite similar in this way...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yes, 702 will come up again soon.

[Guest tcampbell]

While reading the tennessean this morning, I came across an article that Naifeh voted the items down because that is what "the people" want. I think the people he is talking about is the restaurant association. Nashville Palace is one of them. Nashville Palace can kiss my butt. The other HB for the restaurants was voted down because he said he got a lot of calls from restaurants not wanting the bill to pass. If this is true, then we need to find out which restaurants they are. As it stands now, with the exception of work and the arena, if I can't carry there, then I don't go. Naifeh needs to go.

[molonlabetn]

Perhaps a statewide resturaunt petition would be in order... at least it would provide guidance as to which resturaunts to boycott.

[Guest GUTTERbOY]

I did see Serpas in the meeting Wednesday, he came up and talked about one bill, and was undoubtedly there to shake his angry fist at 702 if necessary. It's too bad we can't get some CLEOs that are proponents of CCW to speak on our behalf. Of course, given what I saw Wednesday, that probably wouldn't even make a dent in Sontany or Naifeh.

[Guest EasilyObsessed]

While reading the tennessean this morning, I came across an article that Naifeh voted the items down because that is what "the people" want. I think the people he is talking about is the restaurant association. Nashville Palace is one of them. Nashville Palace can kiss my butt. The other HB for the restaurants was voted down because he said he got a lot of calls from restaurants not wanting the bill to pass. If this is true, then we need to find out which restaurants they are. As it stands now, with the exception of work and the arena, if I can't carry there, then I don't go. Naifeh needs to go.

Even if the bill passed, individual restaurants would still have the option to ban HCP owners from being able to defend themselves inside their establishment by posting the correct signs at all entrances. Because of that, it seems the opinion of restaurant owners really should matter that much?

[Guest GUTTERbOY]

Even if the bill passed, individual restaurants would still have the option to ban HCP owners from being able to defend themselves inside their establishment by posting the correct signs at all entrances. Because of that, it seems the opinion of restaurant owners really should matter that much?

Thinking about this, I wonder if perhaps Naifeh or someone similar contacted the restaurant association first and spun it to them without mentioning that little fact about the sign.

Or it could be that a lot of support is coming from GMs of chain restaurants that might not have any say on the weapons policy in their locations due to corporate regs.

[Guest EasilyObsessed]

Thinking about this, I wonder if perhaps Naifeh or someone similar contacted the restaurant association first and spun it to them without mentioning that little fact about the sign.

Or it could be that a lot of support is coming from GMs of chain restaurants that might not have any say on the weapons policy in their locations due to corporate regs.

What's funny....out of the 4 people I know who own restaurants/bars, all of them have their HCP, and all of them would feel better if they were able to carry in their own restaurants.

[saintsfanbrian]

Easily,

They CAN carry in their own restaurant/bar. The owner or his agent can.

[Guest db99wj]

Easily,

They CAN carry in their own restaurant/bar. The owner or his agent can.

Yes, they sure can, to protect themselves and their place of business, BUT,

if the perform "security" for the patrons, then they would have to go through a armed guard course....I believe I am correct on this. Instructors?

[saintsfanbrian]

So don't perform "security" be there to protect yourself and your place of business. I don't know about you but if some idiot pointed a gun or other dangerous weapon at a person in my office I would be protecting my self and my business by making sure the threat was neutralized.

Remember, did the owner feel that their life was in danger? Did they have reasonable belief of this?

[Guest db99wj]

So don't perform "security" be there to protect yourself and your place of business. I don't know about you but if some idiot pointed a gun or other dangerous weapon at a person in my office I would be protecting my self and my business by making sure the threat was neutralized.

Remember, did the owner feel that their life was in danger? Did they have reasonable belief of this?

I agree with you, but from what I understand, what I mentioned is true.

[Guest canynracer]

I asked my buddy about this, he is a LEO, but his understanding is that if you are deemed a "security guard" for the establishment, you need a guard card....

otherwise, you are protecting YOU and Your business...as Brian stated

[Guest db99wj]

Yep, we are all on the same page.

[Fallguy]

Even if the bill passed, individual restaurants would still have the option to ban HCP owners from being able to defend themselves inside their establishment by posting the correct signs at all entrances. Because of that, it seems the opinion of restaurant owners really should matter that much?

EXACTLY!!!!

...and if I hear "Alcohol and Guns don't mix" one more freaking time...I'm going to puke!!!!! Can't this people read? The HCP holder absolutely can not take even one sip while armed by this bill.

[Fallguy]

Easily,

They CAN carry in their own restaurant/bar. The owner or his agent can.

Yes, they sure can, to protect themselves and their place of business, BUT,

if the perform "security" for the patrons, then they would have to go through a armed guard course....I believe I am correct on this. Instructors?

T.C.A. 39-17-1305©(2) says..

(2) On the person's own premises or premises under the person's control or who is the employee or agent of the owner of the premises with responsibility for protecting persons or property.

Doesn't seem to limit that protection to only the person who is in posession of the firearm.

Also T.C.A. 39-11-612 Defense of third person. Doesn't say force can't be used in a place that serves alcohol to defend a third person.

Here is the TN code (Title 62, Chapter 35) on Security Guards if anyone wants to read it.

[Fallguy]

You know...with that actual wording, "who is the employee or agent of the owner" it would seem an "employee" and an "agent" are two different things. An employee could carry simply because he worked there. However to my knowledge there is no legal definition of what an "agent of the owner" is or would be. Seems to me that if you knew the owner he could simply designate you as "his agent" and it would be legal for you to carry there.

Hmmmmmmmmmm

[saintsfanbrian]

We are all on the same page with guns in ANY establishment. If the owners don't want them there, but up the proper sign and we won't carry them in there. Then again, we probably won't go in there ever again carrying or not.

[Marswolf]

I think the reason the restaurants don't want this to pass is because there is no advantage to them supporting it.

Right now, you can't carry in these places that serve alcohol. If it passes, then they have to make a choice. They either don't post, but assume greater liability if someone does come in and shoot up the place. Or they do post and piss off those of us with carry permits.

There has to be a reason for them to support a change. We could boycott restaurants who do not support us, but permit holders only make up 3% of the Tennessee population and besides, boycotts don't work anyway.

The other possibility is that the law remove the liability to restaurants who allow carry for shooting incidents. Do you think ambulance chasing attorneys would go for that?

The only way we are going to get this put into law is to exchange enough Democrat members in the House with Republicans to vote Naifeh out of the Speaker's seat.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

guys... its going to be hard to unseat that SOB... If "ax the tax" couldnt... what makes you think we can? Realistically?

[Guest darkstar]

guys... its going to be hard to unseat that SOB... If "ax the tax" couldnt... what makes you think we can? Realistically?

Sadly true...that guy is entrenched there because he delivers the pork to his constituents. Maybe someone will get some serious dirt on the guy a la Operation Tennessee Waltz II or something. Of course, like most politicos he'd probably get away with it somehow. Term limits anyone?