Tennessee Senator introduces constitutional carry bill

[kwikrnu]

Senate bill 397 was introduced today which would change Tennessee law to allow the open or concealed carry of firearms within the state. Currently the carry of handguns or longguns is regulated. Tennessee requires a handgun carry permit for its residents to carry a loaded handgun, and the carry of a loaded long gun is illegal.

http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/billinfo/BillSummaryArchive.aspx?BillNumber=SB0397&ga=107

Governor elect Bill Haslam, in an public forum last year, announced he would sign constitutional carry legislation if it passed in the legislature. For the first time since reconstruction, Republicans control the Senate, House of representatives, and the governorship by a wide margin.

[apoliticalone]

I support a national carry law with restrictions to those of sound mind, citizenship, and not a convicted felon.

But speaking as a 30+ year CCW holder, I’m not a big fan of open carry. It makes most people nervous and can work against CCW.

[GailA]

BTT

[OneWingedShark]

I support a national carry law

"What is the Second Amendment?"

with restrictions to those of sound mind, citizenship, and not a convicted felon.

I *really* don't like two of those restrictions:

1. "Sound mind" is not necessarily a good thing to allow the government control, or even mandatory testing for, I seem to remember a while back a guy in WA [I think] who had his weapons seized and was forced to take a mental evaluation because upon being fired he bought several firearms and ammo w/ his money (which, IIRC, was a severance package). Furthermore, I simply DO NOT TRUST the government not to try some argument like "the pathological desire to be armed is proof of mental instability, and therefore anyone desirous of being armed *is* therefore not able to be armed."
2. "Convicted Felon" is such a horrid classification? Why? Because 'felon' is now FAR too broad a term as it covers FAR too many crimes.
   (Such as possession of a lobster. )

In fact, I could RIGHT NOW commit a State Felony, though the State Constitution flatly prohibits the law which would make me a felon; and the jury would likely convict me despite the illegitimacy of the law. I'll show it:

New Mexico State Constitution
Article II, Section 6 - Right to bear arms.

No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.

NMSA 30-7-2.1. Unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon on school premises.

A. Unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon on school premises consists of carrying a deadly weapon on school premises except by:
(1) a peace officer;
(2) school security personnel;
(3) a student, instructor or other school-authorized personnel engaged in army, navy, marine corps or air force reserve officer training corps programs or state-authorized hunter safety training instruction;
(4) a person conducting or participating in a school-approved program, class or other activity involving the carrying of a deadly weapon; or
(5) a person older than nineteen years of age on school premises in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance, for lawful protection of the person's or another's person or property.
 
B. As used in this section, "school premises" means:
(1) the buildings and grounds, including playgrounds, playing fields and parking areas and any school bus of any public elementary, secondary, junior high or high school in or on which school or school-related activities are being operated under the supervision of a local school board; or
(2) any other public buildings or grounds, including playing fields and parking areas that are not public school property, in or on which public school-related and sanctioned activities are being performed.

 
C. Whoever commits unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon on school premises is guilty of a fourth degree felony.

So, I could very easily become a convicted felon having broken no valid law. The excuse would be that I was endangering the children, and that 30-7-2.1 should be upheld, even above the Constitution, for the children.

But speaking as a 30+ year CCW holder, I’m not a big fan of open carry. It makes most people nervous and can work against CCW.

This is very odd; I've had several people notice my open-carry and comment positively thereon. I've had a total of ONE negative complaint from it; and the person was a highschooler in a local Burger King claiming that it was against the law for me to have it there, even after I tried to explain what an open-carry state is. {In hindsight I should have forced her hand and made her call the police for me. Barratry is a crime.}

[apoliticalone]

I don’t totally disagree with you...just giving my initial off the cuff opinion.

The justice system is not equitable at all, and is out of control and felonies are handed out much more than deserved, except if one is a Hollywood elitist princess such as Lohan or Paris Hilton or a sports celebrity, then you are too valuable to be imprisoned.

[marktwain]

Thank you for posting. I predicted that two more states will join Vermont, Alaska, and Arizona with Constitutional carry this year. We may get more than that.

[Dayman]

There's already a national carry law that has been in place for over 200 years and it doesn't allow for any restrictions. Nobody in government has the authority to dictate who may be armed, when, how, or with what. You've become far too comfortable begging for permission to exercise a right.

Open carry is a purer form of carry because it's
unrestricted in most states and can't be used to detain or force someone to show ID like a concealed firearm can be.

Prohibiting felons from owning firearms is a red herring. That wasn't a national law until 1968 and most felons aren't dangerous. Those that are shouldn't be walking free. To strip rights away from an entire classification of people because the government can't do their job and keep the dangerous people locked up isn't a bargain for anyone. Even Canada doesn't prohibit felons from owning firearms.

First it was felons, then “adjudicated mentally defective,” then misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence, then any misdemeanor that carries a potential 1yr sentence... and on and on. Now even a Dr can put you into the NICS system, which is exactly what happened to over 10,000 veterans receiving treatment through the VA a couple years ago. We'd be better off with no restrictions then the slow encroachment we have been forced to so far peacefully endure.

[kwikrnu]

I agree, but I have a lawsuit in Tennessee state courts right now. I lost in a lower court and will now appeal. The judge said in his order that Tennessee law allows for the prohibition of the carrying of arms. The state attorney general says the carry of arms may be regulated and prohibited.

Unfortunately the constitution doesn’t mean what it meant.

[Dayman]

I know. I’ve followed the story over the internet from the incident in the park, the navy revolver, them pulling your HCP, the bullcrap with your form 1, etc. I lived in Knox county for a number of years so I do understand how things can be in that area with the good ol’ boys network.

You were right in all cases and the war isn’t over, you’ve just had some setbacks. Keep figting, each time they screw you over they’re just making your eventual judgement in a 1983 suit better. Justice is a long and slow process, though. It’s a shame you aren’t on OC.ORG anymore because of those LEO moles baiting you, I always enjoyed reading your posts.

[cva66snipe]

I hope this goes through. I think the right to ones own and their families self defense is a GOD given right. Most persons I know who carry do so regardless of standing laws. They have done so for many years even long before 1968 gun laws.

Who is government to determine my security needs or that of my family members? Who is best able to protect me and my family from serious injury or death? Is it ourselves or a government law enforcement agency which in some Tennessee counties might have up to a 20-30 minute wait for help? That's not bad mouthing the agencies but simply stating reality.

Is it fair or morally right for example that if a person is unable due to physical disabilities {unable to run} to escape a danger then be forced to endure it without a means of self defense? I know of several families in this type of situation. They either carry a weapon themselves or a family member with them carries one while they are out and about. There are also good folks living in very rural areas who's life could be in danger from such things as vehicle breakdowns, coming home to a home invasion, etc. It's just good common sense to have a means of protection on you. The best protection is a firearm.

This is one I hope the General Assembly gets pushed through.

[archy]

Thank you for posting. I predicted that two more states will join Vermont, Alaska, and Arizona with Constitutional carry this year. We may get more than that.

Wyoming is looking pretty good. I've had several conversations with one of my state legislators who realizes this matter is a *deal breaker* issue with his constituents not only for their active support, but as to whether they'll begin looking for effective opposition to the reelection of those who stand in its way.

Even better: he's been asking where we should continue on after that, and we've offered some ideas not yet in place in other states- including Arizona, Alaska and Vermont.

[Gaffer]

I support the enforcement of the intent of the Second Amendment. There shall be NO RESTRICTIONS on bearing firearms - loaded or not. States can stop the purchase of them for cases of felonies, conviction, mental illness, etc. but to regulate law-abiding citizens with respect how and when they carry, and what they carry is reason for open revolt.