TN Bill 1774 -- Lawful carry in vehicle without permit

[Oh Shoot]

Don't make the mistake of thinking this bill actually accomplishes anything wonderful...like the so-called "guns in trunks" bill of a couple of years ago; it's nothing more than a bone thrown to the "pro-gun" crowd to keep them (us) quiet since the Republican triumvirate doesn't have the guts to pass anything truly meaningful.

 

Yeah, I gotta respectfully disagree with Robert on this one.  This law change is a pretty big deal.... .

 

I disagree with him too. This is the only de facto nod to constitutional carry since 1870 when it became illegal in the first place.

 

Amazing to me that such a historic enactment has flown almost totally under the radar.

 

- OS

[RobertNashville]

It's still "illegal" to "go armed" in Tennessee and being armed is still not a recognized constitutional right in the state of Tennessee...being able to carry a firearm in your vehicle without getting a permit is not much of a big deal in my opinion.
 
It might be worth noting what John Harris had to say about this "improvement"...
 
 

"While the law seems good, it is a cancerous form of incrementalism that further delays the adoption of constitutional carry in Tennessee. While the bill might sound, pro-2nd Amendment, one must ask why the sponsors felt like the 2nd Amendment infringements on basic rights should be only partially removed?

The legislation, HB 1480 is effective July 1 as Public Chapter 870.

As written, it states that it is an "exception" to a criminal charge of illegal possession of a firearm in a motor vehicle IF A. the person can legally possess a firearm and B. the person is in lawful possession of a motor vehicle (excluding employer provided vehicles where the employer has a written no guns policy).

Thus, the law generally allows for a person who can legally possess a firearm (longarm or handgun) to have such firearm and/or ammunition in a private vehicle that the person legally possess and no handgun permit is required. The firearm may be loaded or unloaded since the statute is silent."

The law creates a number of risks - in no specific order:

- there are a number of other statutes which create exceptions for parks, parking lots, etc., which only apply if the person has a handgun permit. Thus, this new statute would not remove the risk of criminal prosecution under any statute that expressly requires a handgun permit.

- the law does not address employee jobs. If an employer has a no-guns policy, you can be fired if the possession has anything to do with employment (such as leaving it in your car while at work).

- the law does not create an exception for those picking up or dropping off passengers at schools - a permit remains required.

- the law is not an exception to "posted" parking lots.

- the law would not apply to state parks, federal parks (perhaps), or local parks whether or not the local government has opted out.

TFA does not recommend reliance on this statute other than, at most, occasional transport of firearms by people who do not have permits (e.g., going to and from a range, hunting or a dealer) in which instances the law provides somewhat minimally better cover than the very vague definition of an "unloaded" firearm.

Sadly, its more confusion and bad laws when what the legislature needs to do is write a law that says if you can legally own a firearm, you can carry/transport it no permit required. We should be punishing the violent misuse of firearms not the constitutionally protection ownership of them."

He went on to say...
 

Those opining about whether its legal or not to store a gun in your car, the point is "it depends". If you are un an unposted, parking lot that is not otherwise covered by a local, state or federal regulation, yes its ok without a permit - generally.

If its a location that is covered by a statute or regulation, then it depends on the statute / regulation and many of those - if they provide exceptions - provide them for permit holders only.

All of this "can I" questioning, however, generally applies to criminal prosecutions. Keep in mind that if you park someplace that there can be consequences that are other than criminal. So, for example, if you park at your employer's property - you can be fired. If you park at school and you work there - you can be fired. If you park at school and you attend school - you can be expelled. Ron Ramsey has absolutely refused to do anything about any of the "non-criminal" consequences.

That is why TFA says - don't trust these piecemeal, incremental laws -- too many of them are traps for the unwary."

I guess this law may help some folks but if you really want to be able to carry a firearm in your vehicle and have some protection against prosecution then I'd suggest that an HCP is still the best route...relying only on this law seems to me to be poor protection.

What is most disappointing about this law for me is not the law itself but the fact that the current RINOs in the Tennessee legislature and governor's office could have EASILY passe significant changes such as constitutional carry but rather, chose to engage in dirty politics to kill the bills that would have made a difference. Celebrate this change if you wish but I would caution that doing so will only divert your attention from putting pressure on the worthless politicians who chose to throw us a bone rather than let us come to the BBQ. ;) Edited July 3, 2014 by RobertNashville

[Oh Shoot]

It's still "illegal" to "go armed" in Tennessee and being armed is still not a recognized constitutional right in the state of Tennessee...being able to carry a firearm in your vehicle without getting a permit is not much of a big deal in my opinion.
 
It might be worth noting what John Harris had to say about this "improvement"...

 

Totally agree, it is not a panacea, nor is it actually a right as long as the TN Constitution reads as it does. And yes, there are other laws that can come into play. Nonetheless, it's still the most significant step for the TN citizen to bear arms in public since 1870 (I don't see being allowed to pay for a privilege in the same realm).

 

Perhaps that's a sad commentary rather than a jubilant one, but it is nonetheless that significant.

 

And btw, John is wrong about a thing or three in his dismissal, the most obvious mistake being  "the law does not create an exception for those picking up or dropping off passengers at schools - a permit remains required."

 

That's absolutely false, that exception does not mention carry permits at all. One has always been able to possess firearms while picking up/dropping off, obviously subject to other laws that determine the manner in which the firearms may be kept in the vehicle period -- so that now includes loaded firearms by anyone not prohibited from owning them.

 

- OS

[300winmag]

The open carry bill never fixed the school, park, or sign posting problems either.  We probably lost the park carry bill this year because of all the time spent on the open carry bill.

 

If I have my pick between a bill that will let me legally open carry at Wal Mart WITHOUT a permit and a bill that would decriminalize me carrying WITH a permit anywhere in the state, I think I'd pick the handgun carry permit improvements.

 

You will probably never get a bill passed that has open carry without a permit anywhere including in schools, parks, and places of employment with no gun policies.  That is the political reality of the situation.  You may be able to get a bill passed that decriminalizes carry in parks and schools with the permit.  You also will probably not get a bill passed that forces schools to allow guns by policy and lose their ability to ask people to leave.

[Clod Stomper]

We gain our rights back the same way they were infringed. By incrementalism.

As for the John Harris comments, in addition to what OS said, some of those points aren't really relevant. Yes, you can still be fired for having a firearm in your car in an employer's parking lot. You can also be fired for driving a yellow Prius. (And quite honestly, should be) Nothing changed for the worse. Only for the better.

Had this law been in place in the years before I got my permit, I wouldn't have been driving around in violation.

[JayC]

And unlike John Harris, some of us think it's perfectly fine for an employer to be able to fire you for violate the conditions they set on your employment.  Which is why I don't support the TFA any longer.

 

We gain our rights back the same way they were infringed. By incrementalism.

As for the John Harris comments, in addition to what OS said, some of those points aren't really relevant. Yes, you can still be fired for having a firearm in your car in an employer's parking lot. You can also be fired for driving a yellow Prius. (And quite honestly, should be) Nothing changed for the worse. Only for the better.

Had this law been in place in the years before I got my permit, I wouldn't have been driving around in violation.

[Oh Shoot]

And unlike John Harris, some of us think it's perfectly fine for an employer to be able to fire you for violate the conditions they set on your employment.  Which is why I don't support the TFA any longer.

 

I don't support everything the NRA does, or more precisely perhaps, the decisions they make regarding what issues they choose to ignore, and even the methods they employ for the ones they don't.

 

Similarly, though,  I'm not gonna nitpick John and TFA, as certainly their overall thrust is a big plus, and likely the actual difference in passage of some of the loosening of restrictions. Matter of fact I just sent in my membership update fee, which I had let lapse by 3 months, oops.

 

Just did same with KnifeRights.org too, which for sure was directly responsible for the 5.5" Voyager legally in my pocket now, and the switchblades in many others.

 

- OS

[mikegideon]

I don't support everything the NRA does, or more precisely perhaps, the decisions they make regarding what issues they choose to ignore, and even the methods they employ for the ones they don't.

 

Similarly, though,  I'm not gonna nitpick John and TFA, as certainly their overall thrust is a big plus, and likely the actual difference in passage of some of the loosening of restrictions. Matter of fact I just sent in my membership update fee, which I had let lapse by 3 months, oops.

 

Just did same with KnifeRights.org too, which for sure was directly responsible for the 5.5" Voyager legally in my pocket now, and the switchblades in many others.

 

- OS

 

Yeah. I gotta remember to sign up with Knife Rights. I agree. They were very hands on with the Tennessee legislation. They even posted a thread on Blade Forums on July 1, talking about the victory here in TN. Great folks.

[JayC]

I can't support an organization that cries foul every time the legislature proposes police officers, judges, and DA getting 'special privileges' then turns around and tries to carve out a special protected class of worker which violates the core values of the 2nd Amendment freedom movement.

 

I like John a lot, had lunch with him a few times, and helped out with TFA on the technical side some.  Nice guy, but I'm 100% against this idea they're pushing to put a government permit between the employee/employer relationship.  Hopefully they'll let it die next year, because I'd like to be able to support the TFA again.

 

As for the NRA, I'm a lifetime member, and they call on a regular basis asking for money, and every time I hang up and make a donation to GOA, because they don't compromise.

 

I don't support everything the NRA does, or more precisely perhaps, the decisions they make regarding what issues they choose to ignore, and even the methods they employ for the ones they don't.

 

Similarly, though,  I'm not gonna nitpick John and TFA, as certainly their overall thrust is a big plus, and likely the actual difference in passage of some of the loosening of restrictions. Matter of fact I just sent in my membership update fee, which I had let lapse by 3 months, oops.

 

Just did same with KnifeRights.org too, which for sure was directly responsible for the 5.5" Voyager legally in my pocket now, and the switchblades in many others.

 

- OS

 

[petecounter]

I was told by leo from pulaski at my hgc class that its unlawful for anyone under 21 to be in possession of a handgun. Also, the new vehicle law.... even some leo's dont know about this new law yet, I have a good friend who is a wayne county sheriff deputy who says they still havent been notified.

[Oh Shoot]

I was told by leo from pulaski at my hgc class that its unlawful for anyone under 21 to be in possession of a handgun....

 

So wrong. 18 year old can even legally buy one in private sale.

 

- OS

[monkeylizard]

I was told by leo from pulaski at my hgc class that its unlawful for anyone under 21 to be in possession of a handgun.

 

That's wronger than a wrong thing that is mistaken.

[Someotherguy]

Nope..the federal law states you have to be 21 to purchase a handgun from a FFL(gun shop) only...Private sales are legal as long as you are at least 18 years of age...

[Oh Shoot]

Nope..the federal law states you have to be 21 to purchase a handgun from a FFL(gun shop) only...Private sales are legal as long as you are at least 18 years of age...

 

Federal law allows the states to override 18 USC 922 in determining age of possession and purchase. There are at least 8 states where you can open carry a handgun at 17 and younger.

 

- OS

Edited July 21, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[Someotherguy]

Federal law allows the states to override 18 USC 922 in determining age of possession and purchase. There are at least 8 states where you can open carry a handgun at 17 and younger.

 

- OS

I was not aware of this...Thank you for the education :0)

[JayC]

Including TN under certain circumstances.

 

 

Federal law allows the states to override 18 USC 922 in determining age of possession and purchase. There are at least 8 states where you can open carry a handgun at 17 and younger.

 

- OS