HB 0995/SB 1171 Parks

[Oh Shoot]

So "immediate vicinity" is now legislation waiting to be signed by the Governor?  He will not sign that, might even veto.  I would, that language is absurd.

 

No grayer than lots of others; I'll settle for it. "Immediate vicinity" of ammo is already used in relation to going armed or not.

 

- OS

[Oh Shoot]

According to this it's headed to the guv....
http://wkrn.com/2015/04/16/guns-in-parks-bill-headed-to-wary-governor/

 

Hopefully, he'll just not sign it, letting it become law as he did with change to preemption statute last session.

 

My rep, Smith, has done the "present not voting" thing on this all along. I presented the case to him that the TN Constitution says that only the Legislature has the right to enact laws regarding the wearing of arms. I do not believe that allowing local control "by proxy" of a state statute such as 1311 is within the intent of that.

 

- OS

Edited April 16, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[phiferran]

Rep. Womick is confident Haslam will allow it to become law without his signature. Hope he is correct.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Guest realmarauder]

Hopefully he will just sign it and not delay us.

[xsubsailor]

 Haslam is a politician, I don't think he will put his signature on it, pro or con.

 

If he has his eyes on Lamar's seat, it would be political suicide to veto it.

[eRay]

 Haslam is a politician, I don't think he will put his signature on it, pro or con.

 

If he has his eyes on Lamar's seat, it would be political suicide to veto it.

 

This is what I am hoping for.

[GKar]

Just watched the videos of both floor sessions - no real big surprises.  The usual conflagrated arguments by the reps from the blue cities.  But, for those of you who remember and vote, this little tidbit: Madame Speaker Harwell and Sen Overbey both voted "no" to final passage of the amended bill/majority conference committee report...but in their own words, they support the Second Amendment...

[JAB]

Just watched the videos of both floor sessions - no real big surprises.  The usual conflagrated arguments by the reps from the blue cities.  But, for those of you who remember and vote, this little tidbit: Madame Speaker Harwell and Sen Overbey both voted "no" to final passage of the amended bill/majority conference committee report...but in their own words, they support the Second Amendment...

 

All we heard for years from the Republicans was that if we would just put them in charge they would help restore our gun rights.  Then they gained control and immediately started giving us the collective bird on firearms issues.  Honestly, there was more meaningful gun rights legislation passed with New Jersey Democrat Bredesen in the Gubernatorial office and Naifeh as Speaker than we have seen since the Republicans took control (legal carry of guns where alcohol is sold, 'castle doctrine' inspired laws, legal carry of guns in state parks, etc.)

Edited April 17, 2015 by JAB

[Tnscooter63]

Hopefully, he'll just not sign it, letting it become law as he did with change to preemption statute last session.

 

My rep, Smith, has done the "present not voting" thing on this all along. I presented the case to him that the TN Constitution says that only the Legislature has the right to enact laws regarding the wearing of arms. I do not believe that allowing local control "by proxy" of a state statute such as 1311 is within the intent of that.

 

- OS

if he doesn't sign it then how long before it becomes law?

[SithL0rd]

So he's got 10 days to sign it or it becomes law anyway correct? When does it take effect after that? is it a July 1 deal or right away?

[Garufa]

Governor has 10 days to sign after receiving the bill.  If he does not sign within those 10 days it becomes law.

 

This one is effective immediately (as soon as it becomes law), the public welfare requiring it.

[LagerHead]

if he doesn't sign it then how long before it becomes law?

if he doesn't sign it then how long before it becomes law?

Ten days.
Ten days.

Quoted it twice, so I thought I'd better respond twice. :D Edited April 17, 2015 by LagerHead

[phiferran]

After the bill is transmitted to the Governor, he has 10 days--Sundays do not count.   http://www.capitol.tn.gov/about/billtolaw.html

 

Signed by Speakers After the Speakers sign the enrolled copy, it is automatically transmitted to the Governor for his action. Signed by Governor The Governor may sign the bill; veto it; or allow it to become law without his signature. The Governor is allowed ten days (Sundays excepted) after a bill is presented to him to approve or veto the bill; if he takes no action within that period, the bill becomes a law without his signature. The Governor also has constitutional authority to reduce or disapprove any sum of money appropriated in any bill while approving other portions of such bill.

[Oh Shoot]

Bill tracker doesn't show it as having been sent to Gov yet:

 

http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB0995

 

- OS

[JohnC]

Oh Shoot, summarize what we gained here after it is all said and done and becomes law.

 

I apologize, I am usually as up on this stuff and most of you here, but I've been working 10.5 hours a day and driving 2.5 hours a day, etc., so I've not had much time to follow this or keep up with anything lately. 

[Oh Shoot]

Oh Shoot, summarize what we gained here after it is all said and done and becomes law.

 

It's big. To put it simply, you can carry in any city or county park, rec area, greenway, whatever. The "opt out" option for local gummit to prohibit such included in 39-17-1311 will be zapped. You can of course already carry in any state park.

 

Technically, seems you could even carry in coliseums/arenas that are dedicated to rec events, as most are, and shouldn't be posted as normal buildings under 39-17-1359, but that's a gray area that wasn't apparently even discussed in the whole shebang.

 

It will still be prohibited to carry in "immediate vicinity" of school activity within a park, another gray area, but one that probably won't cause any hassles at all, at least for concealed carry folks. :)

 

Assuming he doesn't veto it. Since he likely wouldn't do it until legislature adjourns, would almost certainly mean would have to start over from scratch next session, and anything could happen by then. This seems as about as good a change as we could get, and I'm frankly quite surprised it made it at all.

 

- OS

Edited April 18, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[JohnC]

It's big. To put it simply, you can carry in any city or county park, rec area, greenway, whatever. The "opt out" option for local gummit to prohibit such included in 39-17-1311 will be zapped. You can of course already carry in any state park.

 

Technically, seems you could even carry in coliseums/arenas that are dedicated to rec events, as most are, and shouldn't be posted as normal buildings under 39-17-1359, but that's a gray area that wasn't apparently even discussed in the whole shebang.

 

It will still be prohibited to carry in "immediate vicinity" of school activity within a park, another gray area, but one that probably won't cause any hassles at all, at least for concealed carry folks. :)

 

Assuming he doesn't veto it. Since he likely wouldn't do it until legislature adjourns, would almost certainly mean would have to start over from scratch next session, and anything could happen by then. This seems as about as good a change as we could get, and I'm frankly quite surprised it made it at all.

 

- OS

 

Thanks! This is a larger win than I thought it would be. I figured it would get watered down and not be enough of a change. Glad it went this well! :up: 

[Worriedman]

would almost certainly mean would have to start over from scratch next session, and anything could happen by then. This seems as about as good a change as we could get, and I'm frankly quite surprised it made it at all.

 

- OS

I think, and will have to verify, that the GA could override a veto in the next year, as it is still this General Assembly (109th Session of), odd years are just part of the same session that ends in even numbered years.  He would get his spanking in January, he will not do that I don't think.

Made a call, I was correct, next January is simply an extension.  Even my bill HB0410, (Elder Abuse bill taking "aggravated stalking" to a Class E Felony from a misdemeanor) while relegated to Finance sub in both houses, is still alive and I do not have to start over (rolled to the first calender of Finance next year).  "Uncertainties" at the end of an even numbered years is a death knell, but this year Parks survives to be overridden if the squishy governor vetoes.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Worriedman

[K191145]

It's big. To put it simply, you can carry in any city or county park, rec area, greenway, whatever. The "opt out" option for local gummit to prohibit such included in 39-17-1311 will be zapped. You can of course already carry in any state park.

 

Technically, seems you could even carry in coliseums/arenas that are dedicated to rec events, as most are, and shouldn't be posted as normal buildings under 39-17-1359, but that's a gray area that wasn't apparently even discussed in the whole shebang.

 

It will still be prohibited to carry in "immediate vicinity" of school activity within a park, another gray area, but one that probably won't cause any hassles at all, at least for concealed carry folks. :)

 

Assuming he doesn't veto it. Since he likely wouldn't do it until legislature adjourns, would almost certainly mean would have to start over from scratch next session, and anything could happen by then. This seems as about as good a change as we could get, and I'm frankly quite surprised it made it at all.

 

- OS

 

I haven't been commenting much simply because I wanted to see what would actually come from all the back and forth haggling and amending and trying to follow all the legal proceedures in the state legislature just confuses me more.

So this may be a dumb question but, say this becomes law, i'm at the local park carrying my handgun and a school bus pulls in full of kids on a field trip. Do I have to immediatly leave or am I automatically a felon?

[Worriedman]

It is the same as in a business, if your are notified, you have the opportunity to leave without being "guilty", failure to do so after notification is like in a business, you would guilty of criminal trespass there, in a park if you failed to leave you would run afoul of 39-17-1351.

[macville]

It is the same as in a business, if your are notified, you have the opportunity to leave without being "guilty", failure to do so after notification is like in a business, you would guilty of criminal trespass there, in a park if you failed to leave you would run afoul of 39-17-1351.

 

It's amazing how school kids somehow magically override our rights to bear arms... I honestly think there would be a great lawsuit if you were in a park and school kids showed up. But you'd have to document it somehow.

[Oh Shoot]

It's amazing how school kids somehow magically override our rights to bear arms...

 

It wouldn't be fair to mass killers to have good guys with guns anywhere around the kids.

 

- OS

[Oh Shoot]

I think, and will have to verify, that the GA could override a veto in the next year, as it is still this General Assembly (109th Session of), odd years are just part of the same session that ends in even numbered years.  He would get his spanking in January, he will not do that I don't think.

Made a call, I was correct, next January is simply an extension.  Even my bill HB0410, (Elder Abuse bill taking "aggravated stalking" to a Class E Felony from a misdemeanor) while relegated to Finance sub in both houses, is still alive and I do not have to start over (rolled to the first calender of Finance next year).  "Uncertainties" at the end of an even numbered years is a death knell, but this year Parks survives to be overridden if the squishy governor vetoes.

 

Excellent, thanks for that information. Duh on me for not  knowing that rather basic fact about Session numbering.

 

- OS

[K191145]

It is the same as in a business, if your are notified, you have the opportunity to leave without being "guilty", failure to do so after notification is like in a business, you would guilty of criminal trespass there, in a park if you failed to leave you would run afoul of 39-17-1351.

 

So i'm assuming that if you see the bus pull in you're supposed to leave. I guess that means the entire park, like if kids on a field trip were on the soccer field in Burns Park in Kingston Springs and I was fishing in the park pond 500+ yards away out of sight, I still would have to leave.  :shrug:

[Oh Shoot]

So i'm assuming that if you see the bus pull in you're supposed to leave. I guess that means the entire park, like if kids on a field trip were on the soccer field in Burns Park in Kingston Springs and I was fishing in the park pond 500+ yards away out of sight, I still would have to leave.  :shrug:

 

Only if you construe "immediate vicinity" to include entire park.

 

- OS