Ramsey speaking on Parking Lot Bill again

[Worriedman]

[url="http://blogs.knoxnews.com/humphrey/2012/12/lt-gov-ramsey-has-a-guns-in-ca.html"]http://blogs.knoxnew...guns-in-ca.html[/url]

From the Lt. Gov. in the article:

[quote]"There has been zero problem with these people across the state. ...If the whole population was as responsible as the people who carry these little cards here, we could literally shut down our prisons. ...You should be able to keep a firearm locked in your glove compartment. ...If we passed this bill tomorrow, you wouldn't know the difference the next day. We may exempt out schools, that's fine, but even then we're talking about public parking lots. ...There's got to be a way to keep it in a car legally. "[/quote]

[GKar]

Wow...what a difference 8 months makes. This sounds like 2010 all over again. Of course, in that time, I've also learned the truth in "Fool me once, shame on you..."

We'll see.

[jtmaze]

Wow. Would you like for me to post the email correspondence he and I had last session with him. Is he up for reelection.


JTM
Sent from my iPhone

[Worriedman]

[quote name='jtmaze' timestamp='1354647181' post='854818']
Wow. Would you like for me to post the email correspondence he and I had last session with him.
[color=#ff0000]I can only imagine, but yes actually, I would like to see it.[/color]

Is he up for reelection.
[color=#ff0000]No, he did not have opposition in his race this last time, and he is in for 4 more years.[/color]


JTM
Sent from my iPhone
[/quote]

[Worriedman]

[quote name='GKar' timestamp='1354643106' post='854786']
Wow...what a difference 8 months makes. This sounds like 2010 all over again. Of course, in that time, I've also learned the truth in "Fool me once, shame on you..."

We'll see.
[/quote]

You are not alone in your seeming skepticism...

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Okay, maybe Ramsey is a little schizoid on the issue, but I'll take it, right now. What politician is not in campaign mode?
That probably had a lot to do with it, last time, and it will probably be there again.

The bill shouldn't exclude any college parking lot, though.

[Worriedman]

[quote name='6.8 AR' timestamp='1354649262' post='854843']
Okay, maybe Ramsey is a little schizoid on the issue, but I'll take it, right now. What politician is not in campaign mode?
That probably had a lot to do with it, last time, and it will probably be there again.

The bill shouldn't exclude any college parking lot, though.
[/quote]

The last face to face I had with him led me to believe that he did not intend to allow exclusions.

Just what he intends to use to get Speaker Harwell to agree escapes me at the moment, as she has already said she would NOT allow this to come to the floor, but we shall see.

[Mike.357]

[quote name='6.8 AR' timestamp='1354649262' post='854843']


The bill shouldn't exclude any college parking lot, though.
[/quote]

it should not exclude any parking lot period.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Agree, but I was only being specific about that article. The college crowd thinks their stuff doesn't stink. Ivory towers.

[Mike.357]

I figured as much 6.8.

I doubt a parking lot bill will ever come to a vote anyway, and if by some chance it does it will be so watered down it will be virtually worthless.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I have my doubts, too, but at least some rumblings are being heard.

[GKar]

Trying to stay on track with the OP and not get derailed like the other thread did...

Just playing out some paranoid scenarios in my head. Taking this amazing change of heart, and combining it with some rumblings about committee realignments (particularly some possible chair realignments), and its not too much of a stretch to this conjecture: this bill (as he's described it) is indeed intro'd, but is predestined to be neutered in various committees on its way to the floor. The altered version manages to gain approval by the supermajority, but is nothing more than a weak resemblance of the bad versions seen in the last GA. Senate and House ldrshp can then hide behind the "we tried and got a pkng lot bill passed" rock, thus avoiding (for the most part) the groundswell of anger that consumed Maggart, The villains in the scenario become the committees...which, in that they are a group of folks, make a much more difficult target for voter anger...so those who oppose the watered legislation basically are left poundig sand. Businesses aren't too upset, cause the passed bill will give them numerous outs. See - politics at its finest!

Then again, I may just be a bit paranoid...

[QuietDan]

[quote name='GKar' timestamp='1354682366' post='855126']
Trying to stay on track with the OP and not get derailed like the other thread did...

Just playing out some paranoid scenarios in my head. Taking this amazing change of heart, and combining it with some rumblings about committee realignments (particularly some possible chair realignments), and its not too much of a stretch to this conjecture: this bill (as he's described it) is indeed intro'd, but is predestined to be neutered in various committees on its way to the floor. The altered version manages to gain approval by the supermajority, but is nothing more than a weak resemblance of the bad versions seen in the last GA. Senate and House ldrshp can then hide behind the "we tried and got a pkng lot bill passed" rock, thus avoiding (for the most part) the groundswell of anger that consumed Maggart, The villains in the scenario become the committees...which, in that they are a group of folks, make a much more difficult target for voter anger...so those who oppose the watered legislation basically are left poundig sand. Businesses aren't too upset, cause the passed bill will give them numerous outs. See - politics at its finest!

Then again, I may just be a bit paranoid...
[/quote]

Target the committee chairs. Don't let them hide.

[GKar]

And so Haslam offers a different take:

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-12-05/haslam-excluding-campuses-key-to-gun-law-deal

Which shell is the pea under now?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Ramsey sounded good on the quote in Businessweek. Haslam could have refrained.

[RobertNashville]

We cannot allow a parking lot bill to pass...PROPERTY RIGHTS TRUMP ALL ELSE.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='Worriedman' timestamp='1354651387' post='854860']
The last face to face I had with him led me to believe that he did not intend to allow exclusions.

Just what he intends to use to get Speaker Harwell to agree escapes me at the moment, as she has already said she would NOT allow this to come to the floor, but we shall see.
[/quote]Maybe that is precisely his plan...he can be allowed to look like the big pro 2A knight on a white horse while Harwell blocks the bill; no harm to her since I don't think anyone ever thought of her as much of a 2A supporter anyway. Haslam gets to stand above the fray and look like a Governor without actually doing anything at all.

[jtmaze]

I am wondering if Maggert losing her primary has anything to do with this. You all may be right. Ramsey plays good guy for a run at Haslam's job when his two terms are up and Harwell plays to block the bill so Ramsey can keep his hands clean. This is where we as a whole need to keep to the grindstone and let our Reps know that we want this bill and end Harwells career if we can. Let the RINOs know how we feel.


JTM
Sent from my iPhone Edited December 5, 2012 by jtmaze

[Guest fauklin]

Haslam needs to go out in 2014. We can do better.

[jtmaze]

There was a misquote in that article. It said all we are doing is making it legal. I thought the bill was supposed to make it where an employee couldn't be fired for having a legally posessed gun in his car.

[Guest 270win]

we have had two years of not having the parks situation fixed, fine signs, and schools and we elected a republican supermajority this fall. The parking lot deal is an easy thing to change.

We sure aren't getting rewarded for a super majority republican legislature. Edited December 7, 2012 by 270win

[JayC]

[quote name='razorback2003' timestamp='1354842698' post='856152']
we have had two years of not having the parks situation fixed, fine signs, and schools and we elected a republican supermajority this fall. The parking lot deal is an easy thing to change.

We sure aren't getting rewarded for a super majority republican legislature.
[/quote]

Why pass laws when you can wait until you're the minority again and reuse the 2nd amendment as a wedge issue The party doesn't support the 2nd amendment unless it serves some political purpose. Stop electing RINOs

[Worriedman]

[quote name='JayC' timestamp='1354846930' post='856210']
Why pass laws when you can wait until you're the minority again and reuse the 2nd amendment as a wedge issue The party doesn't support the 2nd amendment unless it serves some political purpose. Stop electing RINOs
[/quote]

On this JayC, we agree 100%.

[GKar]

And from Thursday, we get this:

 

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20121214/news/312140117/lt-gov-ron-ramsey-outlines-compromise-gun-bill

 

"Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey said his office is working on a measure that would require employers to allow firearms in their parking lots. But businesses that provide secured parking for their employees would be able to demand that their workers show them they have a valid permit to carry a handgun and could keep that registration on file."...

 

"Ramsey’s proposal that workers should have to place their permits on file would apply only to employers who offer secured parking. Businesses that have open parking lots or parking that is shared with the public would not be able to demand permits.

 

"Ramsey said his proposal also makes no distinctions for educational institutions, which have been among the strongest opponents of guns-in-trunks legislation. Gov. Bill Haslam has said he would oppose any bill that does not allow colleges and universities to ban firearms on their campuses.

 

“What’s campuses got to do with it?” Ramsey said. “We’re talking about your automobile. We’re not talking about where you are. We’re talking about your car.”

[Oh Shoot]

“What’s campuses got to do with it?” Ramsey said. “We’re talking about your automobile. We’re not talking about where you are. We’re talking about your car.”

 

And in my opinion, that's as deep as the discussion needs to go.

 

YOUR car, YOUR property. The employer has chosen to provide a parking lot for YOUR car, and that's a reasonable expectation on the part of employees. If the employer doesn't agree, let him run shuttle buses in from some other staging point or only hire from the available pool of long distance walkers.

 

- OS