Tennessee Firearms Assoc. Inc.

I found this on another forum. Anybody know anything about it ?
[url]
http://www.wmctv.com/global/story.asp?s=10551474[/url]

Other than that it's probably illegal, no. They can post their businesses, but posting the public street? 18 USC Chapter 242 may be a problem for them.

Ye it wont last long. Memphis does not have the authority to ban guns on a public street. They can also not mandate that buisnesses post.

I completely agree that this is foolish of them and it won't last. I'd love to be able to carry and see some of my friends in concert.

During certain hours isn't "Beale Street" considered one large bar? There are street vendors that dispense beer outside of the normal establishments

HCPs will drive away tourists....but waving metal detectors over everyone's butt won't?

My question is about having Memphis Police Officers provide security, seems somehow not quite right, spending the tax payers money to provide security for a profit making venture??

If the area is Posted, is it not illegal for security to carry under the current law?

I thought the only way a LEO could be there with his weapon is in performance of Official Duty, i.e. investigation of a crime? Doing searches seems to fall outside that parameter to me.

That was my question. If in fact the location is posted, LEO's are not allowed to carry unless in the official function of their duty, don't see where the owner or his employees would be allowed if it is posted either?

Evidently I misunderstood the Posting rules. I was aware that HB 898 allowed for off duty LEO's to carry, I had been led to believe that the posting of an establishment denied that to anyone other than LEO's in their official capacity, i.e. investigating a crime.

If this is the case, then the employees of an establishment have fallen into a special "class".

So, to sum up, a Posted establishment simply restricts law abiding HCP Holders from carrying. LEO's on duty or off, designe's of the Owner are still allowed to carry.

What does that do to their responsibility for the patron's safety? As the HCP Holder is restricted from providing for their own, does the Owners representative who is lawfully armed assume a role for protection to and from a vehicle in the parking lot? The Owner by electing to post has precluded my right to bear arms for my protection, while keeping theirs.

This needs attention in the Legislature. If a venue decides that weapons on my person are a hazard, then their designators for safety, who as I understand it, are not even required to have a HCP, no training at all are allowed to carry. There is something seriously wrong with this scenario.

As I have conversed with John, we do not all have to agree on every issue.

It would seem that if an Owner decides to post against HCP's and LEO's, then the person he puts in charge of carrying would at least need the minimum training. As any venue can post, not just those that serve alcohol, the possibility that someone authorized to be in charge of safety might just be less than desirable to be afforded that responsibility. No background check is required for the individuals so named by an Owner. It would seem prudent to at least hold any individual given defense against restrictions to use at lest the same criteria that you and I are required to satisfy.

Personally, with the exception of Dr.'s offices and Hospitals, I do not frequent establishments that deny me my Constitutional rights. They would not like the GSR on my money. Might give them hives!

At last month's TFA Shelby County meeting the topic came up. Acording to someone there, the actual pavement that is between the barricades is private property. It has been leased to the Beale Street folks.

However, I'm not sure that it wouldn't still be considered a public street. I own property to the middle of the road, but Shelby County has a 45 foot prescriptive easment, thereby making it a public road. I cannot control what goes on there, even though I own it. Maybe Beale Street is the same way.

If a woman can sue mcdonalds and win over hot coffee, i think it's clear you can hold responsible a business owner while your on his or her property.It seems there's a little knee jerk reaction of wanting to force those business to the light of truth. they have the right to refuse business if they post .You have the right not patronize their establishment, and should stay out. Let them pay others death benefits and enjoy the new business they get from the criminal element of society,after all it means the criminals won't be where your at.