TN Attorney General Opinon On Park Property

[monkeylizard]

Yeah. I definitely read 1311 and 1359 as a Venn diagram with civic centers, arenas, and "other building facilities" in that messy overlap area. That said, I think it's very clear that those places would have to be posted in some way to fall under 1359 since they can't be banned under 1311.

 

The AG's opinion lists "park, playground, civic center, or other facility owned by the county or municipality" so that would seem to encompass that middle area, meaning they can't be posted. He doesn't specifically say they can't be banned under 1311, just that they can't be banned. So ISTM that he's expanding the list of locations to which 1359 defers to 1311.

 

Clearer than the Mississippi River during Memphis in May.

Edited August 3, 2015 by monkeylizard

[Oh Shoot]

Haslam says,  "since AG's opinion has raised questions that may justify lawmakers reviewing the guns-in-parks measure for possible clarity."

 

The "questions" of course always involve how can we possibly allow the people we reluctantly license to carry to actually carry.

 

http://www.wbir.com/story/news/politics/2015/08/03/haslam-says-guns-in-parks-bill-worth-reviewing-for-clarity/31071349/

 

- OS

Edited August 4, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[Chucktshoes]

Haslam says, "since AG's opinion has raised questions that may justify lawmakers reviewing the guns-in-parks measure for possible clarity."

The "questions" of course always involve how can we possibly allow the people we reluctantly license to carry to actually carry.

http://www.wbir.com/story/news/politics/2015/08/03/haslam-says-guns-in-parks-bill-worth-reviewing-for-clarity/31071349/

- OS

Accurate.

[DaveTN]

Ok folks, here's the real deal now. Now it's a different ball-game with the AG's opinion out on this.
 
IF the Chief Law-Enforcement Officer of your state says doing XYZ is NOT a crime, and you then do XYZ, you CANNOT be charged with a crime, because that would be ENTRAPMENT. If they attempt to do this to you, use this as your defense.
 
The AG mentioned the word "recreation" several times in that opinion. That means publicly owned zoos, amphitheaters, stadiums, arenas, museums, etc. are all now LEGAL to carry at, either openly or concealed whether or not they are managed by a private entity, unless otherwise restricted by state law.
 
Print out this opinion and carry a copy with you to show any officer called to arrest you.

Certainly you can be charged. That’s why they call it an “opinion”. The AG doesn’t make law; he is interpreting what he thinks the law is. A Judge is not bound by his opinion and could disagree.

If you decide to “test” a law you should talk with the attorney that will be representing you in your case.

[LagerHead]

Once you have been asked to leave, neither law nor opinion matter because you are now trespassing.

[monkeylizard]

Once you have been asked to leave, neither law nor opinion matter because you are now trespassing.

 

Unless you can prove that the lawful handgun was the reason for being asked to leave a place covered under 1311. Then I don't see how you could be trespassing*. If that were the case then you could be asked to leave a city park because your picnic basket is the wrong color and trespassed for non-compliance with the order to leave.

 

 

 

*A LEO can charge you with it, but there's no way it's going to stick.

Edited August 4, 2015 by monkeylizard

[LagerHead]

Unless you can prove that the lawful handgun was the reason for being asked to leave a place covered under 1311. Then I don't see how you could be trespassing*. If that were the case then you could be asked to leave a city park because your picnic basket is the wrong color and trespassed for non-compliance with the order to leave.

 

 

 

*A LEO can charge you with it, but there's no way it's going to stick.

 

I'm not a lawyer, don't play one on TV, and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express(R) last night, so I'm not going to say anything you said is wrong, but I am sure as heck not going to be the test case. ;)

Edited August 4, 2015 by LagerHead

[monkeylizard]

I'm not one either. Notice that I did say the LEO could charge you for it. I just don't see how it could stand up in court. A public place, owend and operated by the public via thier city/local government for the express purpose of being used by the public? I don't see how you could be trespassing if you're not violating any lawful rules. Charged with it, sure, but not convicted of it.

 

But like so many things, it depends on how deep your pockets go.

Edited August 4, 2015 by monkeylizard

[300winmag]

The park carry law was written poorly because a lot of these politicians truly do not want us carrying anywhere.  By writing the law poorly, it allows an option to hassle someone they do not want carrying.  Why else do you think we have a law that says it is illegal to have a weapon 'with intent to go armed'.  In most states, it is made clear that CONCEALING is illegal.  It is an unclear law that has probably been used for a long time to hassle select people.

 

The park law and the school law both could have been written with a clear one line exception for people with handgun carry permits, just like the school shooting teams and licensed armed guards have. Instead, the legislators wrote paragraphs of unclear garbage because they really don't want us carrying.  Do I think the average handgun carry permit person will be hassled? No I don't.  But I do think if you are at some rec property and your weapon is seen you may be asked to leave.  If you don't leave and argue, that is when the unclear law is used to hassle you. 

[Oh Shoot]

The park carry law was written poorly because a lot of these politicians truly do not want us carrying anywhere.  By writing the law poorly, it allows an option to hassle someone they do not want carrying.  Why else do you think we have a law that says it is illegal to have a weapon 'with intent to go armed'.  In most states, it is made clear that CONCEALING is illegal.  It is an unclear law that has probably been used for a long time to hassle select people.

 

The park law and the school law both could have been written with a clear one line exception for people with handgun carry permits, just like the school shooting teams and licensed armed guards have. Instead, the legislators wrote paragraphs of unclear garbage because they really don't want us carrying.  Do I think the average handgun carry permit person will be hassled? No I don't.  But I do think if you are at some rec property and your weapon is seen you may be asked to leave.  If you don't leave and argue, that is when the unclear law is used to hassle you. 

 

None of that is really relevant to the discussion methinks.

 

The disagreement is over the type of property covered by the statute, and whether that property changes status depending on who has control of it for a given time span. The recent change to allow carry didn't change any of the existing basic "definitional" parts of 1311 or 1359, which do not completely jibe.

 

- OS

Edited August 4, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[phil1979]

Of course, we know what a corrupt or inept judge could do.

 

However, this should not even get to that point. Do you think a prosecutor would back off when the AG points to his opinion and says it's not a crime?

 

Doesn't the AG have this much pull in TN?

 

Hasn't the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that you cannot be convicted if you are a victim of entrapment? Isn't it entrapment if the Chief LEO says it's not a crime, but they try to get you anyway?

[DaveTN]

Of course, we know what a corrupt or inept judge could do.

Their decisions are not opinions; they are case law. Only the legislature or the courts can change or interpret law.
 

However, this should not even get to that point. Do you think a prosecutor would back off when the AG points to his opinion and says it's not a crime?

He could, he is an elected official of the County.
 

Doesn't the AG have this much pull in TN?

Enough to overrule a DA or stop a court from hearing a case? No. Does he have that much pull in GA?
 

Hasn't the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that you cannot be convicted if you are a victim of entrapment? Isn't it entrapment if the Chief LEO says it's not a crime, but they try to get you anyway?

No, entrapment has nothing to do with this. Wrongful arrest or prosecution laws would pertain; but only to the written or case law, not an AG opinion. Edited August 5, 2015 by DaveTN

[monkeylizard]

I don't know why you keep referring to the AG as a Chief LEO. He's not a law enforcement offcier. He's the other side of that coin.

[Pain103]

 Doubt that would even come close to entrapment. Until they make it carry legal with no exceptions you are going to have these crazy opinions and certain people trying to skirt the law.

[phil1979]

Just assuming, you know. :-)

 

Holder has been said to be the nation's Chief LEO, and he was an AG. Maybe I connected the dots wrong? LOL

 

I don't know why you keep referring to the AG as a Chief LEO. He's not a law enforcement offcier. He's the other side of that coin.

Edited August 7, 2015 by phil1979

[300winmag]

I think one important question to ask is does LP Field let off duty LEO's that are carrying walk past the metal detectors at NFL games or are off duty LEO's that are carrying turned away?  We know it is legal for them to carry at LP Field at the games but are the Titans turning them away when they are found carrying?  If the NFL, NHL, and NBA events in Tennessee are making off duty LEO's leave, then we may have a difficult time getting those events to not turn away people with handgun carry permits.

[tartanphantom]

I think one important question to ask is does LP Field let off duty LEO's that are carrying walk past the metal detectors at NFL games or are off duty LEO's that are carrying turned away?  We know it is legal for them to carry at LP Field at the games but are the Titans turning them away when they are found carrying?  If the NFL, NHL, and NBA events in Tennessee are making off duty LEO's leave, then we may have a difficult time getting those events to not turn away people with handgun carry permits.

 

If I recall correctly, as of Sept. 2013, the NFL policy does prohibit off-duty LEO from carrying at games.

 

That being said, the state of Texas has told the NFL to go pound sand, and allows off-duty LEOS to carry at Cowboys and Texans games. Also a Minnesota Police association has/had a suit pending against the NFL regarding this rule, but I do not know the status of that suit.

 

The NFL's weapons policies are the precise reason that they do not get a dime of my money-- not tickets, not merchandise, nothing.

Edited August 8, 2015 by tartanphantom

[phil1979]

Anyone lately carry openly at places made legal by the new parks law? Specifically, those publicly owned places that still believe they can ban guns?

It may be getting to be about time to start showing them they cannot defy state law.

Finally, is the Memphis Zoo posted?

 

[Shorty]

Towards the bottom of their list of rules at the entrance it says no firearms, but I haven't seen an actual  gun buster sign if memory serves.

[Pain103]

On 8/7/2015 at 11:45 AM, 300winmag said:

I think one important question to ask is does LP Field let off duty LEO's that are carrying walk past the metal detectors at NFL games or are off duty LEO's that are carrying turned away?  We know it is legal for them to carry at LP Field at the games but are the Titans turning them away when they are found carrying?  If the NFL, NHL, and NBA events in Tennessee are making off duty LEO's leave, then we may have a difficult time getting those events to not turn away people with handgun carry permits.

 LP Field will not let you carry in their stadium off duty. That's fine because nothing the Titans have done lately have encouraged me to attend that place and I try my best not to spend any money where the Metro Nashville Gov might get a sliver.