New legislature for TN

[Guest colrmccoll]

Another thread today got me to thinking about the concealed carry in restaurants where alcohol is served and the difficulty in getting this passed.

We have a new representative and I emailed him and expressed my interest in this matter. Further, I told him that I thought was the biggest obstacle was the previous house speaker.

I heard from him in less than 3 hours expressing his support.

ColR

[Guest jwp]

Was the person you contacted Ryan Haynes?

[Guest pjblurton]

I contacted my guy the week of the elections and congratulated him on his re-election and told him of my interest in the restaurant carry legislation. He too reaffirmed his support.

[Guest colrmccoll]

Yes, it was Ryan.

[Guest Rugerman]

I told my guy the night of his reelection, and he is a republican who was backed by the NRA, and he said he will never vote for it.

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

I told my guy the night of his reelection, and he is a republican who was backed by the NRA, and he said he will never vote for it.

If your talking about Jim Cobb he told me he would vote yes for carrying in restaurant that server alcohol.

[Guest Rugerman]

If your talking about Jim Cobb he told me he would vote yes for carrying in restaurant that server alcohol.

I hope so. He told me I could eat at McDonalds with my gun. I then got sick to my stomach after hearing this and sort of tried to leave. It lit a fire in me to do whatever I can to help the NRA.

[I_Like_Pie]

Now that Georgia has it...no blood in the streets yet...I can see it being much more likely to pass now that Neifeh is gone.

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

I hope so. He told me I could eat at McDonalds with my gun. I then got sick to my stomach after hearing this and sort of tried to leave. It lit a fire in me to do whatever I can to help the NRA.

I sent him an email to see just where he stands on this. I'll let you know what he says.

[Guest Rugerman]

I sent him an email to see just where he stands on this. I'll let you know what he says.

Thanks, GG.

[Guest Rugerman]

Thanks, GG.

Just to clarify a bit, he said he would never vote for it (or any bill) because it would have allowed people to carry in places whose primary purpose is to sell alcohol. Does anyone have a copy of the bill in question they could post, because that was not my understanding of the bill.

[Fallguy]

The last bill that was advanced would have removed the restriction period, so yes, it would have allowed carry in a bar, nightclub or any place that served alcohol, even if that was the only purpose.

My understanding is, that there is nothing in TN law that defines what a bar, tavern, nightclub, etc... is. I think that was something that was going to try and be worked out over the summer so as there could be a bill that would allow carry in a restaraunt while still restricting carry in bars and the like.

Of course since this will be a new session starting in Jan, a new bill will have to be written and introduced from scratch.

[Guest TnDeerHunter]

It seems to me Tn. limits the right to carry in most of the places where you would be more likely to need to. Would be nice if you knowed the crooks would abide by the same laws we have to.

[Guest adavid02]

In GA you can anywhere that derives atl east 51% of its sales from food. That being said you should see some of the "restaurants." I did a business license check on my favorite local bar and it turns out they are licensed as a restaurant. Meaning I can carry there.

[Guest nraforlife]

The last bill that was advanced would have removed the restriction period, so yes, it would have allowed carry in a bar, nightclub or any place that served alcohol, even if that was the only purpose.

My understanding is, that there is nothing in TN law that defines what a bar, tavern, nightclub, etc... is. I think that was something that was going to try and be worked out over the summer so as there could be a bill that would allow carry in a restaraunt while still restricting carry in bars and the like.

Of course since this will be a new session starting in Jan, a new bill will have to be written and introduced from scratch.

That summer session never took place supposedly.

[Fallguy]

In GA you can anywhere that derives atl east 51% of its sales from food. That being said you should see some of the "restaurants." I did a business license check on my favorite local bar and it turns out they are licensed as a restaurant. Meaning I can carry there.

Seems like I heard the main argument against a "51%" law by the Restarunts Association is that it would be extra accounting work for them.

[Guest HexHead]

That summer session never took place supposedly.

I'm sure Naifeh had something to do with that.

[Warbird]

Just to clarify a bit, he said he would never vote for it (or any bill) because it would have allowed people to carry in places whose primary purpose is to sell alcohol. Does anyone have a copy of the bill in question they could post, because that was not my understanding of the bill.

This is complete and utter Bovine Scattology. HE should know better, but being a doofus moron he probably doesn't. There are no true bars in the state of Tennessee. If you sell liquor by the drink you MUST sell 51% of your business in food, or you just don't stay in business. You can sell beer and beer only w/o selling food. This idjit is just trying to scam someone into thinking he is really for it but for this wee bit of difference. What he argues doesn't exist in Tennessee. And there's also a provision that no matter where you go to eat, if you drink you are breaking the law if you are also carrying. DOh!

[Warbird]

Seems like I heard the main argument against a "51%" law by the Restarunts Association is that it would be extra accounting work for them.

BS, as I said in the above post, it is already the law that places who serve liquor by the drink must already sell 51% of receipts in food. THERE ARE NO TRUE BARS IN TENNESSEE.

[Warbird]

That summer session never took place supposedly.

Summer sessions only rarely take place. However, they never take place in election years.

[strickj]

BS, as I said in the above post, it is already the law that places who serve liquor by the drink must already sell 51% of receipts in food. THERE ARE NO TRUE BARS IN TENNESSEE.

Can you show proof of this?

Reason I ask,I have been in several bars that no way in hell they sold more then 20 bucks worths of food a night.

What about clubs? Are they considered bars or something different? Once again,Iv never seen anyone eating in clubs Ive been to

[Guest GUTTERbOY]

TCA 57-4 deals with liquor serving stuff. I warn you, don't read too much of it, lest your faith in the legislature be reduced even more. TONS of really bizarre code in there.

Anyway, this is (one of) the definitions of a "restaurant":

(A) “Restaurant” means any public place kept, used, maintained, advertised and held out to the public as a place where meals are served and where meals are actually and regularly served, without sleeping accommodations, such place being provided with adequate and sanitary kitchen and dining room equipment and seating capacity of at least seventy-five (75) people at tables, having employed therein a sufficient number and kind of employees to prepare, cook and serve suitable food for its guests. At least one (1) meal per day shall be served at least five (5) days a week, with the exception of holidays, vacations and periods of redecorating, and the serving of such meals shall be the principal business conducted. A restaurant shall also be eligible for licensure under this subdivision (27)(A), if the restaurant serves at least one (1) meal a day at least four (4) days a week with the exception of holidays, vacations and periods of redecorating, and if the serving of such meals is the principal business conducted, and if such restaurant is only open for four (4) days a week;

Nothing there about any particular percentage of sales, just the requirement that meals be regularly served. However, later on, there is an alternative definition of "restaurant" that points toward what Wabird is saying:

(F) “Restaurant” also means a facility located in any municipality having a population in excess of one hundred thousand (100,000), according to the 1990 federal census, or any subsequent federal census, in which coffees, teas, pastries, and other foodstuffs are offered for sale for consumption on the premises, which facility has a seating capacity of at least thirty (30) seats and which facility obtains at least fifty percent (50%) of its annual gross sales from the sale of coffees, teas and pastries. Any restaurant licensed under this subdivision (27)(F) shall be authorized to sell alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises only when such beverages are mixed with coffees, teas and other beverages. A restaurant licensed under this subdivision (27)(F) need not meet the requirement of subdivision (27)(A);

Now, just to give an example of how obtuse this code is, here are a couple of other definitions of a "restaurant". Best I can tell, this is how they allow certain businesses to get around the generic rules:

(G) “Restaurant” also means a facility:

(i) Located within one-half (½) mile of the railroad tracks in the unincorporated area of any county having a population of not less than thirty thousand two hundred (30,200) nor more than thirty thousand four hundred seventy-five (30,475), according to the 1990 federal census or any subsequent federal census;

(ii) Whose primary source of income is from serving meals to its patrons, both indoors and out-of-doors, and has a total seating capacity of at least seventy-five (75) people at tables;

(iii) Located in a building having a total square footage of at least two thousand five hundred square feet (2,500 sq. ft.) which was constructed prior to 1925; and

(iv) Which is located on a site used during the Civil War or within two (2) miles of two (2) or more Civil War sites, or is within one and one-half (1 ½) miles of a home that was built in 1884, and which is preserved as the area's best example of the Queen Anne and Eastlake architectural styles;

(I) “Restaurant” also means a facility:

(i) Located on Highway 243 in a county having a population of not less than sixty-nine thousand four hundred (69,400) nor more than sixty-nine thousand five hundred (69,500), according to the 2000 federal census or any subsequent federal census;

(ii) That has seating for not more than one hundred forty (140) people;

(iii) That has a music and entertainment orientation;

(iv) Whose primary source of income is derived from serving meals to its patrons;

(v) That has a historic working original malt and soda fountain;

(vi) That is located in a historical structure formerly used as a town hall as well as a practice venue for Grand Ole Opry hopefuls; and

(vii) That does not discriminate against any patron on the basis of age, gender, race, religion or origin; and

I think I have a headache now.

Edited December 2, 2008 by GUTTERbOY

[waynesan]

I can't begin to imagine what the debate in the committee meetings where this stuff was hashed out sounded like.

[strickj]

Now, just to give an example of how obtuse this code is, here are a couple of other definitions of a "restaurant". Best I can tell, this is how they allow certain businesses to get around the generic rules:

Cool beans!

So that really blows the "debate" for the whole bar bill doesn't it!

Is there anything written specifically for bars? I know there is some difference between "restaurant",and "bar" because of the smoking ban loophole thingy where bars dont have to comply.

Not sure if that definition difference was written just for the smoking ban or not....

ps,good work Gutter! I knew I paid you for something!

Edited December 2, 2008 by strickj

[Fallguy]

This is complete and utter Bovine Scattology. HE should know better, but being a doofus moron he probably doesn't. There are no true bars in the state of Tennessee. If you sell liquor by the drink you MUST sell 51% of your business in food, or you just don't stay in business. You can sell beer and beer only w/o selling food. This idjit is just trying to scam someone into thinking he is really for it but for this wee bit of difference. What he argues doesn't exist in Tennessee. And there's also a provision that no matter where you go to eat, if you drink you are breaking the law if you are also carrying. DOh!

BS, as I said in the above post, it is already the law that places who serve liquor by the drink must already sell 51% of receipts in food. THERE ARE NO TRUE BARS IN TENNESSEE.

39-17-1305 as it is now prevents carry where alcohol period is served not just liquor, but beer also. So even if restaurants must get 51% or more or revenue from food to sell liquor by the drink, that does nothing for keeping up with revenue for the hundreds of restaurants that serve beer only.<O:p</O:p

<O:p</O:p

I didn't say the extra cost of keeping up with how much of sales came from what, just that it was the argument the other side was using.

<O:p</O:p

<O:p</O:p

You are 100% correct about there being no bars in TN, at least not legally defined. But that is the whole trouble. The are some that are inclined to allow us to carry in restaurants, but do not want us to carry in what is commonly know as bars, taverns, etc... But with no legal definition of what a bar or tavern is, they are not sure how to word it. If you simply changed to allow carry only in restaurants, that does nothing to address other places that serve alcohol, but that is still not their man purpose.

<O:p</O:p