New Bill introduced proposing CCW in establishment serving liquor

[Guest canynracer]

cool thanks Len...so basically, we have the opportunity this year to help get this passed next year...

So TGO....if it doesnt go through this time round...what are we gonna do to help our situation?

[Guest Len]

Len I think I described that attempt in this post http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/showpost.php?p=54519&postcount=175 and what happened in 2005. There were a lot of Democrats mad at the Speaker - but they voted for him the next time anyway.

Yeah, well I don't recall many TN Democrats in the house with actual political courage. The terms some of my party friends use to describe them can not be printed in a family-friendly forum.

The process you mention in the referenced post is one way of circumventing the committee process. Bills on the house floor can also be amended depending on the caption, etc. My Rep indicated to me that she thought there were enough Democratic votes in the house for the bill IF it got to the floor. I think there are more than enough -way more than enough, actually. We shall see.

Buford Tune had an interesting twist in his editorial comments in the Sunday Tennessean. He approached the issue as not one of gun rights but rather one of restaurant freedom. Let the property owner do what he/she pleases on their property. If they are ok with allowing carry permit holders to carry, so be it. If they are not, then they can lawfully post their property. The argument has some merit, but puts property rights above the right of self-defense, which some may have trouble with. (Your conversation with the poster from GA in another thread comes to mind.)

[Guest Boomhower]

I've sent out emails to my reps. on 2 separate occasions, and no response to either .

The terms some of my party friends use to describe them can not be printed in a family-friendly forum.

At least we can agree here.

Buford Tune had an interesting twist in his editorial comments in the Sunday Tennessean. He approached the issue as not one of gun rights but rather one of restaurant freedom. Let the property owner do what he/she pleases on their property. If they are ok with allowing carry permit holders to carry, so be it. If they are not, then they can lawfully post their property. The argument has some merit, but puts property rights above the right of self-defense, which some may have trouble with. (Your conversation with the poster from GA in another thread comes to mind.)

We've discussed this before on here, but as it's been said time and time again, we just need to stop patronizing places that full out ban/bar "permit holders" from carry inside their place of business. They already have this ability thru TN law, and it's our personal choice as to where we spend our money. So for that, I fail to see the weight that Mr. Tune's editorial holds with regards to this bill. My business isn't a drop in the bucket for most places that I go, but with more than one making a difference, people will start to change their minds.

[Guest dotsun]

I've sent out emails to my reps. on 2 separate occasions, and no response to either

Same here on my house rep. Boom. I'll not be voting for him this time around.

[Guest Len]

we just need to stop patronizing places that full out ban/bar "permit holders" from carry inside their place of business. They already have this ability thru TN law, and it's our personal choice as to where we spend our money. So for that, I fail to see the weight that Mr. Tune's editorial holds with regards to this bill.

Oh, I generally agree. I think Buford's strategy (and I don't know, so don't quote me) was to appeal to an audience that may not agree with the bill, but that a property rights approach would appeal to (like business owners.)

I dont know about where you live, but around here I rarely (and I mean RARELY) see lawfully posted places that would otherwise be ok to carry.

[Guest clutepc]

I know I've missed this somewhere but what happen to the GA bill that was trying to get passed about carrying where alcohol is served?

Did it get passed....?

I may be totally mistaken but I thought that was up for vote as well.

Just curious.

[Guest Boomhower]

I dont know about where you live, but around here I rarely (and I mean RARELY) see lawfully posted places that would otherwise be ok to carry.

Bingo......but one of my fears with this new law is that if this law passes, we may have repercussions of places being informed of how to legally post their property. As it stands now, I'd say 90% of businesses have no idea as to what the legal signage is.

[molonlabetn]

I don't have a bit of a problem with a restaurant owner deciding for his own property to post... At least then it will be clear which restaurants to avoid and which to patronize (or carry anyways, as the state of things is currently).

It would be nice if the law was amended to say (and be included in the posting verbiage) that the owner of the property is liable for the protection of people who enter, from violent crime, if they are required to be unarmed.

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

I don't have a bit of a problem with a restaurant owner deciding for his own property to post... At least then it will be clear which restaurants to avoid and which to patronize (or carry anyways, as the state of things is currently).

It would be nice if the law was amended to say (and be included in the posting verbiage) that the owner of the property is liable for the protection of people who enter, from violent crime, if they are required to be unarmed.

I agree 100% with that.

[Fallguy]

I know this is slighly off topic and may not be the view of most. But between proper and improper I would rather see a properly posted property than a improper one. Of course I'd rather see none posted and/or the posting not carry the weight of law.

The reason is, even if the property is improperly posted it is more than likely the intent of the owner to ban weapons and despite "concealed means concealed" if you were to be made, I would hate trying to explain the the owner and/or a LEO about the proper means of posting a property.

Another, and possibly more likely to get passed, change I would like to see in 39-17-1359 is a standard (except wording as to location) sign having to be posted. Something with large letters, contrasting colors etc.... I could be wrong, but I feel a most property owners would not want to post a big obnoxious sign and appear to be anti-gun.

[Guest Boomhower]

But between proper and improper I would rather see a properly posted property than a improper one. Of course I'd rather see none posted and/or the posting not carry the weight of law.

So which would you rather see again?............I think I understand what your trying to say:confused:. I think you just mis-stated what you were thinking?

[Fallguy]

So which would you rather see again?............I think I understand what your trying to say:confused:. I think you just mis-stated what you were thinking?

LOL...well...I think my intent still comes through, but I did sort of change what I was going to say after I started typing and didn't clean all of it up.

Ok...try again.

If a property is going to be posted.....I would rather it be proper than improper. But the overall best choice would be for no property owner to post their property or at least the the posting not carry the weight of law.

Better?

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

the most recent information that I have from Reps in the House Judiciary committee is that HB0702 is in the Criminal Practice and Procedure sub-committee of the Judiciary. According to the calendar, it is not scheduled for any specific date at this time. Aaaaaannnnddd sooooooo we wait....

[Guest TNDixieGirl]

You can find the most current information on any bill you're interested in by visiting this link. It's updated hourly.

http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/ Click on Legislation, then Bill Number Index.

[Fallguy]

I sent an e-mail a few days ago to the sponsor of the bill and the chairman of the sub-committee asking for a possible date that it would be heard...no response as of yet.

[dralarms]

According to that info the bill has done nothing since Feb 21, 2007.

[waynesan]

Here are the members of the Criminal Practice and Procedure where HB0702 has been sent:

Chair

Janis Sontany, (D)

Members

Eddie Bass, (D)

Rob Briley, (D)

Henry Fincher (D)

Judd Matheny ®

Eric Watson ®

These are the folks who will take the first shot at this bill. With the shenanigans he pulled last time I know Briley is never going to vote in favor of this bill, but I'm not familiar with the voting record of the others. Any thoughts?

[Fallguy]

According to that info the bill has done nothing since Feb 21, 2007.

That is not so unusal actually... Many bills don't move in the house after the 1st and 2nd readings until a final disposition in the senate for that session.

A session of the legislature is for two years. The 105th General Assembly is for 2007 and 2008. However that means if the bill does not pass this session it would have to be reintroduced and start from scratch in the 106th General Assembly (2009, 2010) the passing in the senate would be gone.

The current make up of the house is 53 Democrats and 46 Republicans so if all 46 Republicans are re-elected and if 4 Democrats were to loose to Republicans in this years election..the Republicans would control the house and could elect a new speaker. In a perfect world at least.

FYI: The current make up of the senate is 16 Republicans, 16 Democrats, 1 Independent. The vote for SB0023 was Ayes 24, Noes 6. The six that voted no were Berke, Burks, Harper, Haynes, Kurita and Marrero all Democrats.

[Guest Boomhower]

*Do you think we could at least have 3 votes?????

Chair

Janis Sontany, (D)

Members

Eddie Bass, (D)

Former, small business owner and Retired Sheriff

Graduate of Giles Co. High School

Graduate of TN Law Enforcement Academy

Graduate of numerous FBI and TBI courses

Rob Briley, (D)

Henry Fincher (D)

Judd Matheny ®

Eight Year Veteran of U.S. Army and Tennessee Army National Guard

Eight Year Veteran of State and Local Law Enforcement

National Rifle Association

Quail Unlimited

National Wild Turkey Federation

Eric Watson ®

Graduate of the Tennessee Law Enforcement Academy

Fraternal Order of Police

National Rifle Association

National Wild Turkey Federation

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

That is not so unusal actually... Many bills don't move in the house after the 1st and 2nd readings until a final disposition in the senate for that session.

A session of the legislature is for two years. The 105th General Assembly is for 2007 and 2008. However that means if the bill does not pass this session it would have to be reintroduced and start from scratch in the 106th General Assembly (2009, 2010) the passing in the senate would be gone.

The current make up of the house is 53 Democrats and 46 Republicans so if all 46 Republicans are re-elected and if 4 Democrats were to loose to Republicans in this years election..the Republicans would control the house and could elect a new speaker. In a perfect world at least.

Fallguy, I think it is worth noting that I have had some email communications with several Senators and House Reps on this issue and I have had very good responses from the Democrats with regard to firearms and conceal carry. I don't think it is totally a problem of having a Democrat controlled House, I think the problem is just in the person that is speaker seems to be a anti-gun person to say the least.

[Fallguy]

Fallguy, I think it is worth noting that I have had some email communications with several Senators and House Reps on this issue and I have had very good responses from the Democrats with regard to firearms and conceal carry. I don't think it is totally a problem of having a Democrat controlled House, I think the problem is just in the person that is speaker seems to be a anti-gun person to say the least.

I agree the bigger problem is the speaker not all Dems, as you can see many did vote yes on SB0023 including mine. However the Dems had a chance to elect a new speaker this last time and chose not too, so based on that I would rather see a GOP controlled house so as to get new speaker.

[Marswolf]

Realistically, I don't see this bill making it through the House. But even if it does, I'm not sure that there will be a lot of impact on reality.

Handgun permit holders are 3% of the Tennessee population, as I recall. That means restaurant are interested in the 97% of the population that don't have a HCP. It's a numbers game. If this passes, the restaurants will put up the signs, not necessarily because they hate handgun carry, but to limit their liability and are interested in that 97%.

If you want to protect yourself or your family, you will have to carry illegally. If you do have to protect yourself, your family, or others, provisions in TCA will be a defense.

The bill needs to prevent anyone from preventing packing anywhere with a permit and also provide protections for the businesses, government, whatever that would be liable by permitting legal packing.

Can you say. "When elephant's fly?"

We are spending too much emotional energy over a bill that both won't go through and that if it did would be largely meaningless.

[Fallguy]

Mars overall I think you are right. But maybe more when Elephants run the house instead of fly...

I too would like to see poperty owners whose property is open to the public prevented from banning armed citizens, but it will take many baby steps to ever get to that point, I am hoping this is one.

In the mean time that is why I still would like to see posted signs not carry the weight of law and/or have to be more standard and VERY conspicuous so as most property owners would not want to post them.

[Marswolf]

I totally agree. We need to go in baby steps. That may work. Giant steps won't make it through the legislature.

We are seeing that in Georgia. The big pro-carry in parking lots bill (DOA) has morphed into a pro-carry in parks bill.

Half-a loaf. Half-a-loaf.

[waynesan]

Mars, you make me want to .

While I see where you're coming from I don't share your pessimistic view of the situation. This year may or may not be the year we see improvements in our carry rights but nothing will ever change if we give up the fight.

I think your assessment of how restaurants would respond if HB0702 were to pass is a little too pessimistic for me. After all, carrying in places that serve alcohol has been successfully done in other states and I see no reason why it wouldn't be a good thing if we passed it here. I visited Penn. last year and carried virtually everywhere I went including restaurants that serve alcohol, and I never saw a sign anywhere. Apparently they have managed to get it done to everyone's satisfaction, and so could we ( I think ).