Carry in parks law

[Guest stbernie]

Anyone have any idea how this law (if passed) would affect carry in Chattanooga at Ross' Landing/Riverfront? I have been told so many different things about that place that I don't know whether it is legal to carry there or not.

Edit: forgot the link

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2014/feb/13/senate-approves-bill-allowing-guns-local-parks-26/ Edited February 14, 2014 by stbernie

[dawgdoc]

I thought (but don't know for sure) that Chattanooga originally opted out of the law (thereby prohibiting guns) for all their parks.  Therefore, if the law passed (without the onerous amendments recently added on), it should make it legal.  

 

I would assume it is currently prohibited just because it is in Chattanooga, but maybe someone else knows for sure.

[peejman]

Best I am aware, carry is currently prohibited in Chattanooga city parks regardless of signage and the proposed law would make it legal, regardless of signage. 

Edited February 14, 2014 by peejman

[Dane]

[quote name="stbernie" post="1110747" timestamp="1392352007"]Anyone have any idea how this law (if passed) would affect carry in Chattanooga at Ross' Landing/Riverfront? I have been told so many different things about that place that I don't know whether it is legal to carry there or not. Edit: forgot the link [url="http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2014/feb/13/senate-approves-bill-allowing-guns-local-parks-26/"]http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2014/feb/13/senate-approves-bill-allowing-guns-local-parks-26/[/url][/quote] It's posted in front of the playground. But should this law get passed without a bunch of bastardizations then yes it would be legal to carry there and in front of the aquarium too. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[DAdams]

SB 1496 passed in the Senate yesterday!!
Contact your Representative for support in the House.

SB 1496
Tennessee Senate Bill

Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, permits a person with a handgun carry permit to carry a firearm in any state, county or municipal park or other recreation area; deletes provisions allowing local governments to prohibit carrying in parks by resolution or ordinance. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

★ Login to follow this bill
View latest bill text Edited February 14, 2014 by DAdams

[K_peezy58]

Any news on this?

[Guest stbernie]

Looks like it's been "taken off notice" in the house committee. I'm not 100% what that means, but it doesn't sound good.

I like to use a site/app called Open States to track legislation like this.

[Oh Shoot]

Looks like it's been "taken off notice" in the house committee. I'm not 100% what that means, but it doesn't sound good.

 

The legislature adjourned a month ago, bro.  The bill you're referencing and companion bill in House both died by March.

 

http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=SB1496

 

The only thing that happened this term that will affect carry in some parks is the stronger state preemption statute, such that parks/rec areas cannot be closed to carry by grandfathered local ordinances.

 

http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/default.aspx?BillNumber=SB1612&GA=108

 

- OS

[netmindr]

Since the bill died, I read the current law to say that if the city prohibits carry in their parks, even though there is no signage at a particular park or greenway trailhead, it is still illegal to do so.

 

Does anyone see this any differently?

[Oh Shoot]

Since the bill died, I read the current law to say that if the city prohibits carry in their parks, even though there is no signage at a particular park or greenway trailhead, it is still illegal to do so.

 

Does anyone see this any differently?

 

Completely differently.  Current law (linked in post 8) is now that cities/counties can only ban carry in parks as per 39-17-1311, which requires signage.

 

No grandfathered local ordinance that banned park carry can now be lawful, such as the one that Knoxville has relied on (that didn't require signage).

 

You may be referring to the AG's opinion of some years ago that you may still be convicted without proper signage, but that remains an opinion and has not been tested in real world of case law.

 

- OS

Edited May 23, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[netmindr]

39-17-1311.  Carrying weapons on public parks, playgrounds, civic centers and other public recreational buildings and grounds. 

 

(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (b)(1)(H), any municipality or county may prohibit, by resolution adopted by a majority vote of its legislative body, persons authorized to carry a handgun pursuant to § 39-17-1351, from possessing the handgun while within or on a public park that is owned or operated by a county, a municipality or instrumentality thereof. If a legislative body elects to prohibit the possession of handguns within a park, the prohibition shall apply to the entire park, notwithstanding subdivision (b)(1)(H). If the area is jointly owned or operated by municipalities or counties, then a resolution adopted by a majority vote of all affected legislative bodies, voting individually, is necessary for the municipalities or counties to prohibit persons authorized to carry a handgun pursuant to § 39-17-1351 from possessing the handgun while within the park.

(e)  (1) Because signage prohibiting the possessing of firearms while within or on a public park, natural area, historic park, nature trail, campground, forest, greenway, waterway or other similar public place that is owned or operated by the state or instrumentality of the state, and posted pursuant to this section prior to July 1, 2009, remains necessary for visitors who are not authorized to carry a firearm pursuant to subsection (b), the department shall not replace or change any existing signs that prohibit firearms or erect any new signs at existing state areas relative to firearms; however, the department may replace or repair signs that have been damaged or are scheduled for replacement in accordance with the park's regular replacement schedule.

   (2) If a municipality or county elects to prohibit persons authorized to carry a handgun pursuant to § 39-17-1351 from possessing the handgun while within or on a public park, it shall display in prominent locations the sign authorized by subdivision (c)(1), to give notice that handguns are not permitted in the park.

 

This is the specific legislation. In section (e)(2) it does read that the signage is necessary, however, in (e)(1)(b) it at least infers that existing signage does not need to be replaced just to include verbiage or other indication that carrying is illegal there.

[Oh Shoot]

This is the specific legislation. In section (e)(2) it does read that the signage is necessary, however, in (e)(1)( B) it at least infers that existing signage does not need to be replaced just to include verbiage or other indication that carrying is illegal there.

 

Read it again more carefully -- that section only applies to state property.

 

County/city "must" post as per statute if they forbid firearm carry by resolution. Whether you can still be convicted if they don't is yet still another matter, same as with 39-17-1359.

 

- OS

Edited May 23, 2014 by Oh Shoot