Employee Safe Commute (Parking Lot) Campaign

[GKar]

The "teamronramsey" was from his Gubernatorial bid days, dated 2010, when he was trying to win friends and get elected, playing the Conservative at the time.

Yep, that was what I was trying to convey: the difference between Ramsey the candidate and Ramsey the legislator. Although it seems that trait is certainly not limited to Mr Ramsey...our legislators are eaten up with it.

[rockman6]

I am thinking / worried that Ramsey will kill the bill when they go to full committee. Pretty bizarre behavior yesterday in the subcommittee...

[GKar]

If my understanding of GA procedures is correct, Sen Ramsey can't formally take any actions on the House bill, which will be going to the full House C&E committee next week. His stated intentions, however (if Ms Harwell is to be believed), would seem to suggest he will (and can) prevent the Senate Calendar committee from scheduling the Senate version of the bill from ever appearing on the Senate floor ( the Senate version having already passed all other necessary committees in the Senate). That he can do regardless of the fate of the House bill...of course, if the House bill dies some other death, its a moot point.

[waynesan]

I've heard several times today on news breaks on the radio that Sen. Ramsey is working to stop the Senate version of the "Safe Commute" bill from going forward. So I called his office and asked the lady who answered if this was true.She said that was absolutely untrue and that Sen. Ramsey is still in favor of the bill and wants to see it pass. I asked if she had been hearing these reports as well and she said she had and again reaffirmed that Sen. Ramsey is still supportive of the bill. She also said she had been getting a lot of calls today about this.

If you would like to call here is his number:

1-800-449-8366 then when asked for the extension you want, punch in 14524.

Edited April 11, 2012 by waynesan

[Sky King]

I've heard several times today on news breaks on the radio that Sen. Ramsey is working to stop the Senate version of the "Safe Commute" bill from going forward. So I called his office and asked the lady who answered if this was true.She said that was absolutely untrue and that Sen. Ramsey is still in favor of the bill and wants to see it pass. I asked if she had been hearing these reports as well and she said she had and again reaffirmed that Sen. Ramsey is still supportive of the bill. She also said she had been getting a lot of calls today about this.

If you would like to call here is his number:

1-800-449-8366 then when asked for the extension you want, punch in 14524.

Well we have all heard the old saying, "don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you read".

I was in Nashville yesterday with John Harris, Executive Director of the TFA and NRA lobbiest Darren LaSorte for the sub-committee hearing. All I can say is that this whole thing could not be more convoluted. I honestly believe that all of these mixed signals and messages are by design, to keep the constituants in cases like this confused.

There has never been any question that the House leadership has opposed this legislation. Even though reports came out from time-to-time that Beth Harwell was not opposed to gun rights, all her actions did not support that claim. Lt. Governor Ramsey has always been a good supporter AND we have the email where he responded to an inquiry stating that he would support legislation of this nature. However this year we saw Lt. Gov. Ramsey do some major back peddaling by wanting to narrow the scope of the bill and provide exemptions to lots that are secured by a fence. Later reports said that Ramsey had communicated to Harwell that the bill will not clear the Senate as he was not going to let it get to the floor for a vote. This took the pressure off Harwell hand her trio of Second Amendment henchmen to stop the legislation because it would be stopped in the Senate.

Repeated attempts by several people to contact Lt. Gov. Ramsey have failed as he has not returned phone calls or emails in resonse to inquiries about this. Most media outlets are saying that he is opposed to this bill as it is has been amended in the Senate. So I find it interesting that his office is now saying that is not true. Just because an amendment was put on the bill in committee does not mean it can't be removed on the floor and he knows that. The amendment offered by Stacy Campfield to also allow hunters is the major obsticle right now because it opens the door to too many people rather than limiting it to permit holders.

While personally I don't have a problem with allowing hunters, the big objection in Nashville is that hunters have not been vetted, (background checks, training etc) as permit holders have. So that amendment can easily be removed on the floor and Ramsey knows it.

The existance of the email has been made public and Ramsey certainly is well aware that it has surfaced and is being circulated publicly. I am sure he is not glad about that but, oh well. I can only speculate that may be why his office is saying what they are saying today.

But as they say, the proof is in the pudding and Beth Harwells actions again tell the real truth about where she stands. We all know it was planned to have the House bills in the C&E sub-committee then immediately in the full committee on the same day. But rather than allow the chair of that committee, Jimmy Eldridge suspend the rules, which is NOT uncommon in the later days of the sessions, so the bill COULD be heard in full committee on the same day, she denied that request. I ask ANY of you to watch the video of the House floor session for Monday. NUMEROUS motions were made and PASSED for suspension of rules for bills so that they could be heard, but not this one. Why? Well we all know why, Harwell wants to drag it out hoping the session will end before any real action to get the bills to the floor for a recorded vote can take place.

The REAL issue here is to get these bills to the Senate and House floors for recorded votes. I honestly think if that can happen, we have the votes to pass them AND I do not believe Haslam can refuse to sign it. No Republican or conservative wants to go into an election cycle with a bad report card from the TFA and NRA. History shows that to be detrimental to their campaign.

Yesterday, while good to see the swift action of the sub-committee, was again frustrating for two reasons. First and most obvious was the fact that there would be no more action that day because of Beth Harwell and her stubborness. Second was again to see the lack of turnout of supporters for this. There were only four of us. Two we all expect to see, John Harris and Darren LaSorte. The other two were myself and one other person to whom I will have to appologize to for not remembering his name, I have met him before though. But that was it. There was no way I could count the number of people there in lab coats and others supporting issues concerning veterinarians. Doctors, vet techs, THEY EVEN HAD DOGS there. Who do you think got all the attention, us or the vets.

I know it would have been a wasted trip for people because the bill was not heard, but we had no way of knowing that and the question is not whether or not the bill was actually heard, the REAL question is how many of you out there actually had any REAL intent to go.

Keep up the calls and emails to Ramsey and Harwell. They HAVE to know that the heat is on.

[Sky King]

I've heard several times today on news breaks on the radio that Sen. Ramsey is working to stop the Senate version of the "Safe Commute" bill from going forward. So I called his office and asked the lady who answered if this was true.She said that was absolutely untrue and that Sen. Ramsey is still in favor of the bill and wants to see it pass. I asked if she had been hearing these reports as well and she said she had and again reaffirmed that Sen. Ramsey is still supportive of the bill. She also said she had been getting a lot of calls today about this. If you would like to call here is his number: 1-800-449-8366 then when asked for the extension you want, punch in 14524.

I just called Ramsey's office and asked pretty much the same thing however the response I got was NOT what you got. I was told that she could NOT speak to the issue but would be glad to pass my comments and concerns on to Lt. Gov. Ramsey along with my phone number. I'll fall over in a dead faint if I actually get a return call.

[GKar]

Things in the office must be getting a bit testy. Just got off the phone with them, where I specifically asked for an answer to a simple question: are Rep Harwell's characterizations of Sen Ramsey's intent to prevent SB3002 from coming to the Senate floor accurate? She stopped short of sayin he supported the bill: only that he supported the rights of Tennessee citizens to be able to protect themselves, and that he'd made press releases about his thoughts on the bill. Then I got the whole runaround about how he hasn't yet made up his mind about the bill yet, he is a champion of 2A rights, he was influential with bringing right-to-carry to Tennessee, he's trying to balance 2A versus property rights, he wants to hear his constituents thoughts...ad nauseum. She asked my thoughts about the property rights issue: I told her I thought Rep Bass did a good job addressing that in the brief time he was allowed in the House subcom - this bill goes no further than the contents of a locked private vehicle, which is my property, and that once a weapon leaves that specified environment it also leaves the protections afforded by this bill. She intoned that he and his staffers have been busy working with the sponsors to try and come up with a compromise, but it was getting late in the session - I asked why, with the bill being filed in late January, it was only now coming under that level of scrutiny? I continued to press about getting an answer to my original question, and that, without any answer fromSen Ramsey, I and the public would simply have to make assumptions based upon Harwell's statement - she finally said that she could not answer that because she was not the Lt Gov. , and would I like to leave a message? I told here that, since the opening of the session and the filing of these bills, I have sent several emails (3? 4?) to Sen Ramsey asking similar questions, including two recent ones asking my specific Harwell question,and have yet to receive a reply, so yes, I would like to leave a message for him: just answer the question. She took my name and phone number - we'll see.

[Worriedman]

Actual constituents count so much more than the casual caller from outside of a Legislator's district. Get as many locals in Ramsey's district as possible to call and demand an answer, then publish the responses.

Edited April 11, 2012 by Worriedman

[Sky King]

Actual constituents count so much more than the casual caller from outside of a Legislator's district. Get as many locals in Ramsey's district as possible to call and demand an answer, then publish the responses.

I agree with that. And for the regular representatives in the General Assembly, that is as it should be, BUT there are a few key positions that EVERY call SHOULD count. When a member serves in a position such as Speaker or when the member is serving on a committee or sub-committee, in that capacity, they are serving the entire state. The speaker of either chamber has control over the entire body and therfore should be accountable to the whole state. Also for issues before a sub or full committee, their actions determine whether or not a bill is ever heard by the whole body and therfore SHOULD remember that they too are working for the entire state. The problem is that THEY don't always seem to get that.

[rockman6]

Found this note on the status of the bills:

Guns legislation – despite the concerns of the business community, higher education, and law enforcement groups – moved quickly out of a House subcommittee with no debate and no amendments this week. All four measures — HB 3559, HB 3560, HB 3660 and HB 3479 — purport to guarantee gun owners’ ability to carry weapons to their jobs. They are headed to House Consumer and Employee Affairs at 8 a.m. next Tuesday. If passed out of Committee the four bills will head to the Calendar Committee. SB 2992 and SB 3002, companions to HB 3559 and HB 3560, were amended and currently sit in Senate Calendar committee.

[Worriedman]

The Senate version, SB 3002 has been debated on the merits in the Judiciary committee and passed out to Calendar and Rules where it simply is supposed to receive a place in line for consideration of the full Senate.

Ramsey is abusing his power by personally keeping it from moving forward to be voted on by the entire chamber, a very Naifehish act. If he wants to vote, as a Senator, against the bill because he has been paid or told to do so, then he should let his conscious be his guide. However, to prevent the rest of the Senators from being able to voice their support, or lack thereof, for the issue is exactly what the "Elite Ruling Class" epitomizes.

[E4 No More]

The Senate version, SB 3002 has been debated on the merits in the Judiciary committee and passed out to Calendar and Rules where it simply is supposed to receive a place in line for consideration of the full Senate.

Ramsey is abusing his power by personally keeping it from moving forward to be voted on by the entire chamber, a very Naifehish act. If he wants to vote, as a Senator, against the bill because he has been paid or told to do so, then he should let his conscious be his guide. However, to prevent the rest of the Senators from being able to voice their support, or lack thereof, for the issue is exactly what the "Elite Ruling Class" epitomizes.

And did you express this to Ramsey?

[E4 No More]

Here's what I got back from Ramsey:

Dear Mr. Jewell,

I share your frustration. As the prime sponsor of Tennessee's original handgun carry permit law, I have always been a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. This session, I have been working hard with members of both chambers to try and pass a bill which balances both gun owners' right to bear arms as well as business owners' right to control their own property.

I support making it legal for handgun carry permit holders to keep their guns in their car in most public parking lots. The problem we face is coming up with a definition of truly public parking lots that respects both property and gun rights. While we may not be successful this session, I hope you will continue to speak out in favor of our right to bear arms as I work towards a resolution to this issue.

Sincerely,

Ron Ramsey

[R_Bert]

Here's what I got back from Ramsey:

Dear Mr. Jewell,

I share your frustration. As the prime sponsor of Tennessee's original handgun carry permit law, I have always been a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. This session, I have been working hard with members of both chambers to try and pass a bill which balances both gun owners' right to bear arms as well as business owners' right to control their own property.

I support making it legal for handgun carry permit holders to keep their guns in their car in most public parking lots. The problem we face is coming up with a definition of truly public parking lots that respects both property and gun rights. While we may not be successful this session, I hope you will continue to speak out in favor of our right to bear arms as I work towards a resolution to this issue.

Sincerely,

Ron Ramsey

Time to step down Mr. Ramsey. Take Beth with you.

"wiggle" words are void of truth and meaning.

Edited April 13, 2012 by R_Bert

[E4 No More]

My retort to Ramsey:

With respect, you, (as in the Republican leadership), are over-complicating a simple idea. All you need do is pass a simple law stating that an employer cannot compel an employee into a search of their private vehicle for any reason. If there is probable cause that a crime has been committed then law enforcement officials would be the ones conducting the search; not an employer.

[Worriedman]

And did you express this to Ramsey?

I can promise that I have, in numerous ways. I worked extremely hard to get him elected to the Governors position in the primary in 2010, and as such, am so very disappointed in the tact he is taking now. In personal conversations about this very issue over the course of the last two years, he led me to believe that he was in favor of the Citizen's Right to provide for their own self defense, and that their private vehicle was their Castle just as much as their home, regardless of where it was parked.

Now we find that he is distancing himself from the support of the individual, and has decided that money and position mean more than his word.

[E4 No More]

I can promise that I have, in numerous ways. I worked extremely hard to get him elected to the Governors position in the primary in 2010, and as such, am so very disappointed in the tact he is taking now. In personal conversations about this very issue over the course of the last two years, he led me to believe that he was in favor of the Citizen's Right to provide for their own self defense, and that their private vehicle was their Castle just as much as their home, regardless of where it was parked.

Now we find that he is distancing himself from the support of the individual, and has decided that money and position mean more than his word.

Money has been demonstrated to change most people's minds.

[R_Bert]

Money has been demonstrated to change most people's minds.

Character is not a variable; rather only the exhibit of resolved strength thereof. (if you don't have it, you never had it.)

[Sky King]

Here's what I got back from Ramsey:

Dear Mr. Jewell,

I share your frustration. As the prime sponsor of Tennessee's original handgun carry permit law, I have always been a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. This session, I have been working hard with members of both chambers to try and pass a bill which balances both gun owners' right to bear arms as well as business owners' right to control their own property.

I support making it legal for handgun carry permit holders to keep their guns in their car in most public parking lots. The problem we face is coming up with a definition of truly public parking lots that respects both property and gun rights. While we may not be successful this session, I hope you will continue to speak out in favor of our right to bear arms as I work towards a resolution to this issue.

Sincerely,

Ron Ramsey

I got the EXACT same response.

[GKar]

Hmmm...he hasn't gotten around to sending me any kind of response. Maybe he's gonna wait and hand-deliver it...

[GKar]

"The problem we face is coming up with a definition of truly public parking lots that respects both property and gun rights."

Read - "the problem we have is coming up with a broad-enough way to define public parking areas that can be exempted so that all of my corporate sponsors, and those of my fellow legislators, are covered."

[Worriedman]

I received a notice that he told TN Reports the measure was dead in the Senate, as HE was going to see that the bill was not put on notice, that HE was going to keep it from getting moved to the calender for the full Senate. Seems an abuse of power, bordering on Official Oppression as far as I am concerned.

At least the way I read the statute:

TCA 39-16-403. Official oppression. —

[a]. A public servant acting under color of office or employment commits an offense who:

(1) Intentionally subjects another to mistreatment or to arrest, detention, stop, frisk, halt, search, seizure, dispossession, assessment or lien when the public servant knows the conduct is unlawful; or

(2) Intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity, when the public servant knows the conduct is unlawful.

. For purposes of this section, a public servant acts under color of office or employment if the public servant acts, or purports to act, in an official capacity or takes advantage of the actual or purported capacity.

[c]. An offense under this section is a Class E felony.

[d]. Charges for official oppression may be brought only by indictment, presentment or criminal information; provided, that nothing in this section shall deny a person from pursuing other criminal charges by affidavit of complaint.

[Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1; 1990, ch. 980, § 11.]

I sent him this text:

Surely the information I received from TN Reports is in error? You do not intend to personally interfere with SB 3002 getting a hearing in the full Senate?

I could never have been convinced that you would abandon your fellow Firearms rights supporters in this fashion.

I have received no response.

Edited April 14, 2012 by Worriedman

[Sky King]

I received a notice that he told TN Reports the measure was dead in the Senate, as HE was going to see that the bill was not put on notice, that HE was going to keep it from getting moved to the calender for the full Senate. Seems an abuse of power, bordering on Official Oppression as far as I am concerned.

At least the way I read the statute:

TCA 39-16-403. Official oppression. —

[a]. A public servant acting under color of office or employment commits an offense who:

(1) Intentionally subjects another to mistreatment or to arrest, detention, stop, frisk, halt, search, seizure, dispossession, assessment or lien when the public servant knows the conduct is unlawful; or

(2) Intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity, when the public servant knows the conduct is unlawful.

. For purposes of this section, a public servant acts under color of office or employment if the public servant acts, or purports to act, in an official capacity or takes advantage of the actual or purported capacity.

[c]. An offense under this section is a Class E felony.

[d]. Charges for official oppression may be brought only by indictment, presentment or criminal information; provided, that nothing in this section shall deny a person from pursuing other criminal charges by affidavit of complaint.

[Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1; 1990, ch. 980, § 11.]

I sent him this text:

I have received no response.

I have heard this from other sources but I can not nail it down as to when he suposedly said it.

[GKar]

I was pleasantly surprised today that Sen Ramsey sought me out and made time to talk with me. He indicated that he had not seen my earlier emails, but was told by his staffer that I had called. While not idrectly commenting on Harwell's statement, he did indicate that he had not made up his mind yet on the current version of SB3002, and he was very hopeful that some version of the bill, perhaps even the current version, would find action by both houses before adjournment. He also indicated that his major hangup with the bill was his struggle to balance his property rights beliefs, which I would characterize as far-reaching, with his belief in 2nd amendment rights. He asked how I would balance the two - and I explained that I felt Rep Bass had done a pretty good job with that in the brief time he spoke before the subcommittee. I dont see a contradiction between the two, in that the bill's provisons of protection do not extend beyond the locked vehicle, and only acknowledge and allow an otherwise legal possession within said vehicle (private property of the firearm owner) that by defnintion remains passive - the bill does not allow any "actions" to be taken by the firearm owner, but rather invisible possession within an otherwise locked and inaccessible vehicle. To the idea that, as a property owner, I would not have to allow the exercise of First Amendment rights, I contend that the very exercise of First Amendment rights, be it verbal, in writing or similar vehicle, by definition is an active process: the ideas relayed by the exercise are visibly, actively made available to others in the immediate area regardless of their efforts to ignore, and thus they are affected even if unwilling. Such is not the case with this bill: by its very definition, the legal possession of a firearm under its auspices MUST not be visible to another person, the vehicle MUST be locked thus preventing anyone else from gaining any type of access to it (and thus being affected by its presence), and the weapon MUST NOT be removed from the vehicle. So not only are others in the vicinity not UNWILLINGLY affected by its legal presence, they are also UNAWARE of its presence even it they were to try and ascertain it.

Sen Ramsey indicated that he would take my thoughts under advisement, and welcomed hearing the htoughts of others - so yeah, make those calls! He then passed along an interesting characterization of a meeting with NRA earlier in the session wherein the NRA rep indicated that they (the NRA) would only "allow" the bill to be amended to limit it to HCP holders, and that no other limitations would be "allowed". Suffice it to say that I dont think the use of the term "allow" by a party that technically doesnt have a vote in the process was taken too well...

[Worriedman]

He then passed along an interesting characterization of a meeting with NRA earlier in the session wherein the NRA rep indicated that they (the NRA) would only "allow" the bill to be amended to limit it to HCP holders, and that no other limitations would be "allowed". Suffice it to say that I dont think the use of the term "allow" by a party that technically doesnt have a vote in the process was taken too well...

Well Fed Ex does not have a "vote" either, and yet it seems that he listens to them. I would suspect that the number of Tennessee NRA members who DO have a vote is a significant number, and merit consideration.