Discussion Of Possible Gun Legislation, Parks Again

[runco]

Looks like there is a planned meeting today (8/13/2015) @ 9am in the legislative library at the state Capitol do discuss new possible legislation, from my read to ban guns again from Parks but based upon threat of loss revenue:

 

http://wate.com/2015/08/13/gun-safety-at-center-of-lawmakers-roundtable-discussion/

 

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WKRN) – Tennessee lawmakers are having a roundtable discussion on gun legislation and the impact on local economies on Thursday.

The discussion begins at 9 a.m. in the legislative library at the state Capitol. Participants include:

• Adam Skaggs, national senior counsel, Everytown for Gun Safety
• Toby Compton, executive director, Metro Sports Authority
• Saul Solomon, director of law, Metro Nashville
• Shauna Billingsley, city attorney, City of Franklin
• Brandt Wood, organizer, Pilgrimage Music and Cultural Festival
• Jon Phillips and Lee Fling, Axis Security, Pilgrimage Music and Cultural Festival
• Beth Joslin Roth, policy director, Safe Tennessee Project
• James Bolden, director of police services, Memphis (retired)

It was prompted by a recent ruling by the state attorney general who found the guns in parks law applies to many concerts, festivals and public events held in parks, even when the local government contracts with private, third-party entities to operate the park.

Tennessee ranks ninth in the nation for both accidental shootings and shooting deaths. However, legislators note that festivals and concerts account for more than $100 million in statewide economic impact.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Don't make a big deal about someone carrying a gun and the other potential customers will not be afraid to attend. When you get a bunch of weak kneed individuals screaming that having guns at these festivals will be dangerous then of course potential customers will avoid going based solely on the statements of those who have irrational fears of guns. If the opposition would just shut up about it attendance should not change. But now, even if attendance were to be higher, they are going to claim a loss of revenue then try to sue someone over it.

[300winmag]

Think about this.  These people are blaming legal handgun carry permit people for their problems in parks.  They are making a bigger deal out of handgun carry permits carrying than gang bangers carrying.  They think gang bangers carrying is just something that happens but throw a fit when an honest man is carrying to protect himself from the criminals.  I've never seen this much effort put into deterring criminals from carrying.

[tartanphantom]

None of the people listed are legislators... judging by there affiliations, they are mostly known gun grabbers. If there are legislators there, they probably didn't have the stomach to list themselves... Except for maybe Harris out of Memphis, but even he's not on the list. This smells fishy.

 

This is gonna be real "productive"... :bs: :waiting:

[Wheelgunner]

My guess is that every person present at this "meeting to discuss loss of revenue" will conveniently forget this year's NRA convention, Beretta relocating to Sumner County and the jobs it is creating, and the fact that Tennesseans have continued to visit local parks (GASP!) despite the presence of lawfully carried firearms.

 

Even if there were some clear data showing that revenue has dropped...

 

And even if lawful carry was proven to be the cause of that drop...

 

Are these folks actually suggesting that revenue takes priority over civil liberties of law-abiding citizens?  Wow.  Just wow.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Has nothing to do with revenue. It is just like everything else, control.

They want to control every aspect of our lives even if it is very, very minor.

Our country never repeals laws, they just choose not to enforce them. But they are still there waiting for the right person to decide to suddenly enforce them again.

Jury nullification can be used to find someone innocent of an old law but most courts will not allow anyone to taint the jury with jury nullification.

[Someotherguy]

yeah, lets make the large concert venues "gun free zones"...since they are sooo successful in preventing gun crimes... :up:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Hozzie]

Time to write my legislators.  Need to get our word in early before they start thinking compromise.

[Trekbike]

Looks like a classic case of a solution in search of a problem...

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk

[tartanphantom]

Evening update to the story posted on WKRN's website.... it's as I figured in my previous post-- excessive  hand-wringing by hoplophobes and gun grabbers with no basis in credible studies, statistics or facts, but plenty of emotional "what-ifs". And wonder of wonders, Memphis Senator Lee Harris WAS there, as I predicted-- leading the charge.

Of course, Speaker Harwell's response when questioned on the matter was total spineless jellyfish material, as expected. Gun owners have ZERO reason to trust her... but we already knew that, didn't we?

 

Here's the link:

http://wkrn.com/2015/08/13/guns-in-parks-changes-explored-on-capitol-hill/

Edited August 14, 2015 by tartanphantom

[Ugly]

The Franklin County Sherrif doesn't seem to trust civilians with firearms, just the law and thugs apparently. This whole gathering is a hit squad.

http://wate.com/2015/08/13/democrats-want-reconsideration-of-tenn-guns-in-parks-law/

[Grunt67]

Has nothing to do with revenue. It is just like everything else, control.

They want to control every aspect of our lives even if it is very, very minor.

Our country never repeals laws, they just choose not to enforce them. But they are still there waiting for the right person to decide to suddenly enforce them again.

Jury nullification can be used to find someone innocent of an old law but most courts will not allow anyone to taint the jury with jury nullification.

 

 Dolomite, you hit the nail right on the head. THis is not so much about gun control, tho it's part of it, it's control in general.

Bloomberg is a leader in gun control as everyone knows, but he's a control freak. From guns to the size of soda you can buy.

The gun hating Libs don't have enough between the ears to realize, by banning guns, wherever, they are only banning legal guns.

The gang bangers, etc., do as they damn well please.

 I read somewhere that a Liberal is someone that believes you can pick up a turd by the clean end. So..............

[300winmag]

Don't let the anti gun crowd fool you.  Many of the wealthy ones either carry guns or hire people who carry guns to protect them.  Sen. Dianne Feinstein used to have one of the few CCW's in San Francisco and later got deputized as a US Marshal so that she could carry for protection anywhere in DC and the rest of the US.  Imagine that, Dianne Feinstein can carry at Univ of Tennessee or Univ of Memphis but you can't carry in those places with your TN handgun carry permit.

 

I've always thought that if people like Bloomberg were serious about not wanting guns in society, then they should lead by example and be the first ones to give up their armed security details and their own carry guns.  If those folks' armed security details can carry in a place, such as a park, then I should be able to carry in a park.  What is supposedly good for them should be good for me.

[tartanphantom]

Don't let the anti gun crowd fool you.  Many of the wealthy ones either carry guns or hire people who carry guns to protect them.  Sen. Dianne Feinstein used to have one of the few CCW's in San Francisco and later got deputized as a US Marshal so that she could carry for protection anywhere in DC and the rest of the US.  Imagine that, Dianne Feinstein can carry at Univ of Tennessee or Univ of Memphis but you can't carry in those places with your TN handgun carry permit.

 

I've always thought that if people like Bloomberg were serious about not wanting guns in society, then they should lead by example and be the first ones to give up their armed security details and their own carry guns.  If those folks' armed security details can carry in a place, such as a park, then I should be able to carry in a park.  What is supposedly good for them should be good for me.

 

 

[Someotherguy]

This aint got a damn thing to do with public safety, or money...

 

 

The powers that be, do not want the minions(us) to have guns...It's just that simple...They are afraid of the populous, because we outnumber them greatly, and it's not very smart for a few thousand ultra rich people to piss off 300 million people with guns...Hence the nonstop efforts by them to disarm the people...Once we are disarmed, then they basically do whatever the hell they want to do to us without fear of reprisal...

 

Resistance is crucial....

[crossfire]

"James Bolden, a retired director of police services in Memphis, and Franklin County Sherriff Tim Fuller noted the negative publicity surrounding recent police shootings that occurred despite the heavy training law enforcement officers receive. They say civilians with handgun permits are more likely to make poor decisions in using weapons".

 

Things that make you say WTF? :stunned:

 

Lets see, the police with heavy training screw up, but it's the civilians with carry permits who are making poor decisions. How does that work? :ugh:

Edited August 16, 2015 by crossfire

[chances R]

Yeah, so in the meantime SHTF. What am I supposed to do....call time out?!?! I am sure the bad guy will wait till the cops arrive.

[Oh Shoot]

Yeah, so in the meantime SHTF. What am I supposed to do....call time out?!?! I am sure the bad guy will wait till the cops arrive.

 

But the cops may make poor decisions, despite their training, so they may shoot you too.

 

- OS

[Dolomite_supafly]

"James Bolden, a retired director of police services in Memphis, and Franklin County Sherriff Tim Fuller noted the negative publicity surrounding recent police shootings that occurred despite the heavy training law enforcement officers receive. They say civilians with handgun permits are more likely to make poor decisions in using weapons".

 

Things that make you say WTF? :stunned:

 

Lets see, the police with heavy training screw up, but it's the civilians with carry permits who are making poor decisions. How does that work? :ugh:

 

 

I would like see how many wrongful deaths occur in the hands of LE officers compared to civilians legally allowed to carry firearms. There are a lot less officers than civilians carrying firearms so if the officer's numbers are even close to being equal to the civilians then it is painfully obvious that his statement is completely false.

 

All they are trying to do is control who can carry a firearm and where they can carry, nothing more. It has nothing to do with public safety or revenue, as they claim. I can guarantee that the vast majority of the those against gun owners would carry a firearm themselves or have security do it for them. So it is not a fear of gun, or the fear of those carrying guns, that drives them like they pretend.

[Worriedman]

But the cops may make poor decisions, despite their training, so they may shoot you too.

 

- OS

That's OK OS, the government is caving to the "Black Lives Matter" crowd, so shortly the cops will be disarmed as well.

Just wait till the general public gets a dose of that...

[Dolomite_supafly]

I found some numbers.

 

In 2014 there were 623 people killed at the hands of approximately 900,000 police officers in the US. It does not say whether these shoots were good or bad. That works out to .00069 deaths per officer.

 

There is an estimated 11.1 million people who carry a firearm for self defense in the US. That is ~11,100,000. And those 11.1 million people killed, on average, 76 people a year. That works out to .00000685 deaths per person carrying a firearm for self defense. 

 

You are 100x more likely to be killed by a LE officer than by someone who carries a firearm for self defense. Even if these number are off by 50% you are more likely to be wrongfully killed by a LE officer than a person carrying a gun for self defense. So those "experts" are full of it.

 

But if you don't compare the numbers to each other and actually look at the percentages you realize that the actual chance of being killed by a person carrying a gun for self defense is nearly a statistical improbability. You are probably more likely to be killed by fireworks, drowning, car accident, stroke or heart disease than by LE or a person carrying a gun for self defense.

 

references:

http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Concealed-Carry-Permit-Holders-Across-the-United-States.pdf

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/enforcement/

http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/concealed-carry/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States,_2014

 

But even if my numbers are off by 50% your are still more likely to die at the hands of LE than at the hand of a person who carries a firearm for self defense.

Edited August 24, 2015 by Dolomite_supafly

[chances R]

Good info Dolo. Not only is that important but look at the 'chicken little' reaction of 'blood in the streets' with any pro-gun legislation. It didn't happen with initial permits, Nat'l parks, State parks, guns-in-bars, guns-in-trunks, etc.,etc. As pointed out,fear mongering and control....NOT facts!

[Dolomite_supafly]

And I don't mean to paint LE in a bad light either. There is approximately 1 in 511,000 chance that you are lawfully killed by law enforcement which is 82x as more likely than being struck by lightening in their lifetime, 1 in 6,250. So statistically you should be struck by lightening 82 times before being killed by law enforcement. And the chance of you being illegally killed by law enforcement is such a statistically small sample that it should never even be feared as a way to die.

Edited August 16, 2015 by Dolomite_supafly

[Dolomite_supafly]

Hopefully I wasn't off by a decimal point. If not those odds are so remote it is unconceivable by me.

[phil1979]

I wonder what it will take for Nashville to start obeying state law? They seem to be thumbing their nose at Attorney General Slatery's opinion, as if he were an idiot for actually believing the law says what it says.

 

Will it take a test case, a lawsuit, what?