Park Carry Bill SB 1496 goes before Committee Tuesday Jan 28th

[Worriedman]

 It would be nice if the TFA could comment on the amendments being proposed, hopefully they will make a statement on it soon.

From John Harris:

 

GUNS IN PARKS!!!! Well, not really. More of TRAPS IN PARKS.

I would urge that those interested in this bill look at it carefully before getting too excited or congratulatory.

I welcome the advance of legislation to eliminate the ability for local governments to prohibit handgun permit holders from enjoying publicly owned parks while maintaining the capacity to defend themselves and their families. But, I also have to deal with the Tennessee legislature enough that I am always cautiously watching to see when and to what extent they are willing to compromise on our rights.

The advance of SB1496 is a step in the right direction but it retains a very dangerous and potentially unconstitutional trap.

It is important to know that it was amended. The amendment on the legislation retains a provision of existing law which creates a trap that could easily result in criminal charges against handgun permit holders.

That amendment automatically renders these public parks "prohibited places" if any part of the park is being used by a school.

Thus, parks which are otherwise open to the citizens could suddenly become prohibited areas exposing handgun permit holders to arrest and criminal charges merely if any school activities are taking place in the park. Consequently, permit holders could be arrested in parks that are otherwise open merely because school students might be using parts of the park for school related sporting events (such as golf, cross-country running, tennis, ball fields) or even organized school activities (such as field trips, nature walks, or end of year parties).

This part of the amendment clearly violates Article 1, Section 26 of the Tennessee Constitution which prohibits the Tennessee Legislature from regulating the wearing of arms unless there is a well defined crime prevention basis for the prohibition. No such crime prevention purpose has been identified to support the "school use" prohibition that is retained in the amendment.

I would urge those interested in this law to call and ask their own legislators if the parks are in fact automatically closed if any part of the park is being used for any school function. If they answer "no" - press them about the amendment.

No matter what their response, try to get them to commit to you that they will remove this provision and pass a clean law without loopholes or risks of criminal prosecution.

[Worriedman]

I got an email today from the NRA about current TN legislation and they are still supporting this bill.

The NRA supported that piece of trash Parking Lot bill last year, they do not always support what is best for us, kind of like their rating for Alexander...

[JayC]

I think John Harris is missing a larger point...  when you say school children people get the impression of kids on a school trip or playing in a high school sport...  but the way the current amendment is worded, any University sponsored activity is also covered under 39-17-1309.

 

So, if two 25 year old graduate students who belong to the University 'bird watching club' go to your local park on an official club activity, or as part of a competitive bird watching competition then the entire state park is now off-limits to HCP users.

 

One might think they'd spot a bus full of kids, or a softball game from a distance...  how do you spot a couple of 25 year olds watching birds?

 

Or an even better question - not related to parks...  if a sorority at the local college sponsors a self defense night at the local range...  who can legally handle a firearm while they're there?  Or what happens when the clay shooting club from MTSU stops by to practice?

 

39-17-1309 is so badly written it's not even funny...  in all likelihood we've all been somewhere off school property carrying and had 'school children' as defined under 39-17-1309 around us while carrying and didn't realize we could be charged with a felony.  I've personally seen Vandy cross country members running down to Bi-Centennial park in downtown Nashville during their practice...  Which is about the only park in Davidson County (plus Radnor Lake) that you can legally carry in.

[JohnC]

I think John Harris is missing a larger point...  when you say school children people get the impression of kids on a school trip or playing in a high school sport...  but the way the current amendment is worded, any University sponsored activity is also covered under 39-17-1309.
 
So, if two 25 year old graduate students who belong to the University 'bird watching club' go to your local park on an official club activity, or as part of a competitive bird watching competition then the entire state park is now off-limits to HCP users.
 
One might think they'd spot a bus full of kids, or a softball game from a distance...  how do you spot a couple of 25 year olds watching birds?
 
Or an even better question - not related to parks...  if a sorority at the local college sponsors a self defense night at the local range...  who can legally handle a firearm while they're there?  Or what happens when the clay shooting club from MTSU stops by to practice?
 
39-17-1309 is so badly written it's not even funny...  in all likelihood we've all been somewhere off school property carrying and had 'school children' as defined under 39-17-1309 around us while carrying and didn't realize we could be charged with a felony.  I've personally seen Vandy cross country members running down to Bi-Centennial park in downtown Nashville during their practice...  Which is about the only park in Davidson County (plus Radnor Lake) that you can legally carry in.

Wouldn't school children mean under 18? Because once they're over 18, they're now adults.

So are you saying even college students who are adults make parks off limits of there is an official activity going on via the school?

I've seen college students 40 to 50 years old. Edited February 15, 2014 by JohnC

[macville]

Wouldn't school children mean under 18? Because once they're over 18, they're now adults.

So are you saying even college students who are adults make parks off limits of there is an official activity going on via the school?

I've seen college students 40 to 50 years old.

 The problem is that the law doesn't say school children, it referees to anything that qualifies as a "school" in TN. That includes college. Heck, it probably could include homeschool for some strange reason if a cop got his panties in a wad. That's why we need to go after "with a view to prevent crime" and get the laws ruled unconstitutional. Because we can't trust the republicans in charge to fix it.

[EastTNMarksman]

I think John Harris is missing a larger point...  when you say school children people get the impression of kids on a school trip or playing in a high school sport...  but the way the current amendment is worded, any University sponsored activity is also covered under 39-17-1309.

 

So, if two 25 year old graduate students who belong to the University 'bird watching club' go to your local park on an official club activity, or as part of a competitive bird watching competition then the entire state park is now off-limits to HCP users.

 

One might think they'd spot a bus full of kids, or a softball game from a distance...  how do you spot a couple of 25 year olds watching birds?

 

Or an even better question - not related to parks...  if a sorority at the local college sponsors a self defense night at the local range...  who can legally handle a firearm while they're there?  Or what happens when the clay shooting club from MTSU stops by to practice?

 

39-17-1309 is so badly written it's not even funny...  in all likelihood we've all been somewhere off school property carrying and had 'school children' as defined under 39-17-1309 around us while carrying and didn't realize we could be charged with a felony.  I've personally seen Vandy cross country members running down to Bi-Centennial park in downtown Nashville during their practice...  Which is about the only park in Davidson County (plus Radnor Lake) that you can legally carry in.

 

Are there state, county or city parks in TN that have gun ranges?

[Guest PapaB]

I think John Harris is missing a larger point...  when you say school children people get the impression of kids on a school trip or playing in a high school sport...  but the way the current amendment is worded, any University sponsored activity is also covered under 39-17-1309.

 

So, if two 25 year old graduate students who belong to the University 'bird watching club' go to your local park on an official club activity, or as part of a competitive bird watching competition then the entire state park is now off-limits to HCP users.

 

One might think they'd spot a bus full of kids, or a softball game from a distance...  how do you spot a couple of 25 year olds watching birds?

 

Or an even better question - not related to parks...  if a sorority at the local college sponsors a self defense night at the local range...  who can legally handle a firearm while they're there?  Or what happens when the clay shooting club from MTSU stops by to practice?

 

39-17-1309 is so badly written it's not even funny...  in all likelihood we've all been somewhere off school property carrying and had 'school children' as defined under 39-17-1309 around us while carrying and didn't realize we could be charged with a felony.  I've personally seen Vandy cross country members running down to Bi-Centennial park in downtown Nashville during their practice...  Which is about the only park in Davidson County (plus Radnor Lake) that you can legally carry in.

 

In the letter I read, posted by Worriedman, there was no mention of children. Mr. Harris did use the term students once, but not children. Oddly, you don't seem to disagree with him about what's wrong, you just attack from different angles. Niether of you want an area to be off limits simply because a school function is being held there.

 

39-17-1309 specifically says

(b) (1) It is an offense for any person to possess or carry, whether openly or concealed, with the intent to go armed, any firearm, explosive, explosive weapon, bowie knife, hawk bill knife, ice pick, dagger, slingshot, leaded cane, switchblade knife, blackjack, knuckles or any other weapon of like kind, not used solely for instructional or school-sanctioned ceremonial purposes, in any public or private school building or bus, on any public or private school campus, grounds, recreation area, athletic field or any other property owned, used or operated by any board of education, school, college or university board of trustees, regents or directors for the administration of any public or private educational institution.

 

I think you're absolutely right about the effect the amendment could have, especially in areas where the head LEO is anti-gun. I just don't see why you think you disagree with John Harris on this issue.

[JayC]

You noticed I said unrelated to parks...  here I'm talking about public TWRA ranges, or private ranges...  If a 'school' group shows up which would include any college/university approved group...  the way 39-17-1309 is currently worded it creates a nightmare on who can and can not touch a firearm.

 

I'm using it as an example to illustrate just how bad the law currently is.

 

Are there state, county or city parks in TN that have gun ranges?

 

[JayC]

I'm not disagreeing with John Harris on anything he said in the letter...  only that this problem has existed for a long time, and the scope of the problem is much bigger.

 

That by highlighting just what is covered when we talk about school activities is more than what any reasonable person would consider...  we do a better job of highlighting just how bad the law is.

 

It's crazy to think that a high school cross country team running through a state park suddenly turns law abiding citizens into felons...  But it is completely ridiculous when you consider the law applies the same for 30-something college students who are participating in a 'school function'.

 

Also, remember it's not just 'students' to have this 'halo of felony' following them around...  the employees of the school/university also have this halo attached to them...  So for example a official retirement party/awards ceremony, would have the same effect...  So would a group of teachers having an offsite meeting.  Where does the insanity of the law end?

 

To fix it all we have to do is change 39-17-1309b1 from:

 

... any other property owned, used or operated by ...

 

to:

 

.... any other property owned, or solely operated by ....

 

Taking that one word out of the law solves all of this.

 

In the letter I read, posted by Worriedman, there was no mention of children. Mr. Harris did use the term students once, but not children. Oddly, you don't seem to disagree with him about what's wrong, you just attack from different angles. Niether of you want an area to be off limits simply because a school function is being held there.

 

39-17-1309 specifically says

 

I think you're absolutely right about the effect the amendment could have, especially in areas where the head LEO is anti-gun. I just don't see why you think you disagree with John Harris on this issue.

 

[Worriedman]

I'm not disagreeing with John Harris on anything he said in the letter...  only that this problem has existed for a long time, and the scope of the problem is much bigger.

Write a letter...

[JayC]

John and I had a discussion about the crazy parts of 39-17-1309 at lunch a few years ago...  I seriously doubt he'd disagree with my opinions on how poorly worded that part of the law is...

 

I just think that highlighting some of the more absurd parts of 1309 would result in more questions about including it into a parks bill,  or changing it all together...  Highlighting adult 'students' and school administrators creating moving felon zones I think would make it harder to justify they're adding this provision "for the children".

 

Write a letter...

[Worriedman]

John and I had a discussion about the crazy parts of 39-17-1309 at lunch a few years ago...  I seriously doubt he'd disagree with my opinions on how poorly worded that part of the law is...

 

I just think that highlighting some of the more absurd parts of 1309 would result in more questions about including it into a parks bill,  or changing it all together...  Highlighting adult 'students' and school administrators creating moving felon zones I think would make it harder to justify they're adding this provision "for the children".

Not to John, to Beth, that is who you need to convince.  John's statement quoted was in respect to the current bill and amendment, you are the one interjection a generality into the conversation, get on it, would love to see 1309 done away with.

[JayC]

Trust me, Beth Harwell was on a first name basis with me during the restaurant carry bill...  when I lived in her district.  Enough so that she routinely avoided calling on me at town halls because of my constant questions about her stance on the 2nd Amendment.

 

But, I'm not sure what she had to do with adding this amendment to this bill...  although frankly it wouldn't surprise me to see her having some hand in it.

 

Not to John, to Beth, that is who you need to convince.  John's statement quoted was in respect to the current bill and amendment, you are the one interjection a generality into the conversation, get on it, would love to see 1309 done away with.