Armed citizens guarding recruitment centers - legal?

[monkeylizard]

http://www.scrippsmedia.com/newschannel5/news/Armed-Volunteers-Guard-Army-Recruitment-Centers-In-Clarksville-318036681.html

 

Blake Farmer on WPLN (Nashville's NPR) had this to say. http://nashvillepublicradio.org/post/self-appointed-guardians-military-recruiting-centers-plan-stay-long-it-takes. I know his liberal head wants to explode, but he did a decent job of telling the side of the men standing guard. His choices of quotes does leave me with a bit of a mall-ninja feeling about the whole thing though.

 

I'm specifically wondering about them being armed with long guns. I'm pretty sure that's not legal here in TN. Am I correct on that?

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating the local DA or LEO fine or arrest anyone over it, just curious.

Edited July 22, 2015 by monkeylizard

[glowdotGlock]

I had wondered too. It seems like someone could come up and "pretend" to be protecting them and then attack from close range. I do understand why though.

[felinesNfreedom]

I was wondering that too. How the Long guns play into this.

[Hozzie]

They are on private property.  So long as the property owner doesn't ask them to leave, they can be there with long guns.  From the info I heard, none of the business at the location in Murfreesboro complained, so the police have no option but to leave them be.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Hozzie

[monkeylizard]

They are on private property.  So long as the property owner doesn't ask them to leave, they can be there with long guns.  From the info I heard, none of the business at the location in Murfreesboro complained, so the police have no option but to leave them be.

 

I don't see how that's relevant. 39-17-1308 provides defenses to being armed. Being on private property isn't one of them unless it's your private property.

Edited July 22, 2015 by monkeylizard

[Hozzie]

Just going by what they said on the news.  They cited that it was private property.  I am guessing that as long as you have permission to be on the private property, then in fact you can have a long gun.  If not, I would not be allowed to shoot at my friend house legally??  That doesn't make sense either.

[bersaguy]

From what I have been told the question was put before several Governors and state Attorney Generals and their replies where that until they begin receiving complaints from the public that they will not interfere with citizens that choose to protect and defend our Country's Protectors until action is taken and the Federal level to arm our military personnel at all military installations from recruiter offices right up to our military bases across the country......................... :usa: :usa:

[Dolomite_supafly]

I don't see how that's relevant. 39-17-1308 provides defenses to being armed. Being on private property isn't one of them unless it's your private property.

Not exactly. You can, with the property owner's permission, do anything the property owner can. There are plenty of employees who carry guns without a HCP at their place of business because the business gave them permission. So if the property owner gave permission it would be no different than telling someone they can carry on my property.

This is a gray area because I would never assume the property owner agreed to allow it because they said nothing to the contrary.

If I were dead set on attempting to protect our service members I would at least write a letter to the property owner asking permission first.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I seen a picture of one "volunteer" who posed for cameras with an AR pistol with a VFG. He will find himself in trouble because several media outlets have posted the pictures and some have questioned the legality of the gun. Btw, the gun had no sights on it which tells me it was a "hey look at me" stunt.

[E4 No More]

Given today's environment, would you want to be the property owner making headlines by denying protection to our military members?

[Titansfan]

I saw photos of guards with long guns and knowing that open carry of long guns is not permitted in TN.  But was one pointed out, the property is private owned and no one complains so be it.

 

I have inquired via text message and email if the recruiting offices close to me (Paris and Union City) if citizens are providing services and not received any confirmation.  I'd join them if I had the contact information of a group leader.  I'd hate to run over to those locations going out of my way.

[Omega]

Not exactly. You can, with the property owner's permission, do anything the property owner can. There are plenty of employees who carry guns without a HCP at their place of business because the business gave them permission. So if the property owner gave permission it would be no different than telling someone they can carry on my property.

This is a gray area because I would never assume the property owner agreed to allow it because they said nothing to the contrary.

If I were dead set on attempting to protect our service members I would at least write a letter to the property owner asking permission first.

That holds true for the most part, except maybe hunting without a license; that's strictly for owner and family.  As for permission, sometimes its better to ask forgiveness than permission.  While all the details of permission are ironed out, this whole event will be yesterdays news and there will be no media asking why service members aren't armed.

 

I seen somewhere that the NG is being allowed to carry if their Commander allows it, I wonder if that is a new or old rule?  Specially in now that it has come to light that at least two had personally owned weapons and engaged the terrorist.

[monkeylizard]

Just going by what they said on the news.  They cited that it was private property.  I am guessing that as long as you have permission to be on the private property, then in fact you can have a long gun.  If not, I would not be allowed to shoot at my friend house legally??  That doesn't make sense either.

 

You can shoot at your buddy's place because 39-17-1308 says it's OK to have loaded firearms "incident to lawful hunting, trapping, fishing, camping, sport shooting or other lawful activity".

Edited July 22, 2015 by monkeylizard

[monkeylizard]

Not exactly. You can, with the property owner's permission, do anything the property owner can. There are plenty of employees who carry guns without a HCP at their place of business because the business gave them permission. So if the property owner gave permission it would be no different than telling someone they can carry on my property.

 

I don't think that's correct. 39-17-1308 allows for carrying at a person's place of business, but that doesn't extend to anyone else who may have property owner's permission. These strip malls are not the places of business of these citizens standing guard. Even with permission, I don't think this is legal with long guns. Right, maybe, but not legal.

[bersaguy]

After what took place last week I really don't see anyone complaining about long guns, short guns or any guns so far, but I do know that a lot of people are thanking those volunteers for their actions as they walk past them in these malls............jmho

[monkeylizard]

I don't disagree. I'm glad they're there. I'm not trying to diminish what they're doing. I think it's the right thing to do.

 

I'm just wondering about the legal aspect of their long guns.

[EssOne]

Sometimes illegal is a sick bird. I think this is one of those times. IMHO. :pleased:

[Oh Shoot]

I seen a picture of one "volunteer" who posed for cameras with an AR pistol with a VFG. He will find himself in trouble because several media outlets have posted the pictures and some have questioned the legality of the gun. Btw, the gun had no sights on it which tells me it was a "hey look at me" stunt.

 

Possible it's 26" or more in legal OAL?

 

- OS

[Dolomite_supafly]

Possible it's 26" or more in legal OAL?

 

- OS

Looked like it was awfully short but perspectives can be skewed in photos. He was a fud anyways because it was a photo op. All he had was the loaded gun (without sights) wearing shorts, T-shirt and Crocs. Definitely not even remotely close to proper attire for a fight.

[monkeylizard]

[Oh Shoot]

I don't think that's correct. 39-17-1308 allows for carrying at a person's place of business, but that doesn't extend to anyone else who may have property owner's permission. These strip malls are not the places of business of these citizens standing guard. Even with permission, I don't think this is legal with long guns. Right, maybe, but not legal.

 

 

That's my take too. In ordinary times, I'm sure hanging out at a strip mall etc with a loaded long gun would get you either arrested or at the least told to vamoose, as I don't see any clear defense or exception to the carry-in-public nature of it.

 

Probably so far letting things slide a bit due to PR aspect.

 

- OS

Edited July 22, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[monkeylizard]

That's what I thought too. I expect that within a few days, the local police will have a to have "the talk". Something along the lines of "Hey, guys. We appreciate what you're doing, but come tomorrow, we really need you to leave the rifles and shotguns at home. Handguns are good to go."

[300winmag]

39-17-1308. Defenses to unlawful possession or carrying of a weapon.

 

(a)  It is a defense to the application of § 39-17-1307 if the possession or carrying was:

 

(4)  Incident to lawful hunting, trapping, fishing, camping, sport shooting or other lawful activity;

 

Other lawful activity is a pretty broad term and can cover a lot of activities.  Of course the guys are legal taking a loaded long gun from home in their vehicle because of the vehicle exemption too.

[Oh Shoot]

....

(4)  Incident to lawful hunting, trapping, fishing, camping, sport shooting or other lawful activity;

...

 

Yep, often quoted, but have never heard of case law exonerating someone for a defined "lawful activity" other than the ones specifically listed in the statutes.

 

- OS

[felinesNfreedom]

I seen a picture of one "volunteer" who posed for cameras with an AR pistol with a VFG. He will find himself in trouble because several media outlets have posted the pictures and some have questioned the legality of the gun. Btw, the gun had no sights on it which tells me it was a "hey look at me" stunt.

 

 

I started looking through pictures and some peoples rigs are pretty funny. Pretty sure one guy had an EOTech on backwards with a bipod and multiple tactical accessories on his hand guard.