Next Session-Firearms in vehicle during workday

[Sky King]

I have traveled to Nashville on three separate occaions to support legislation to accomplish this. On two of those trips, I was able to speak, once and the sub-committee and then at the summer study before the full committee.

Last year, HB 1395 by Josh Evans was sent to summer study. I testified at the Judiciary Criminal Practices Sub-Committee hearing in April AND in September at the summer study.

Josh Evans stated that the corporate lobby was VERY strong against the bill. He stated that "pressure" had been placed on the Republican party leaders to not move the bill. Apparently the corporate lobby threatened to remove support for Republican party cantidates in the next election so as they would loose the majority that they so slimly hold.
Josh Evans made a commitment to the business lobby to not move his bill that session.

With that, I went to Ben West, a Democrat to see if he planned to move his bill, HB 1793. At that time Ben West was recovering from a heart attack and Henry Fincher, a co-sponsor on the bill was handling it. I spoke with Rep. Fincher. He said that there was just not enough support to move the bill.

Summer study, depending on when it happens does not necessarily mean a bill is dead. If the study occurs during the mid-session recess, it can still be moved the next spring. But, if it goes to summer study at the END, like we are now, it is essentially dead. This is because, if my understanding is correct, any bills not acted on before the session adjourns, die.

With all that said, we have a lot of work to do. I have done a great deal of research on the laws of other states and the pending legislation in other states. What I have discovered is that the bills introduced in Tennessee really are not what I would call good bills. In all my conversations, trips and participating in committee meetings, I have had opportunity to hear what REALLY bothers the business and corporate opposition. They will talk about work place safety and work place violence all they want but the REAL issue is liability. They don't want to be at risk of a law suit if somebody fires a weapon on their property and kills or injures somebody regardless of why.

The proposed bills in Tennessee do nothing to address that issue. The best examples of bills and laws can be found, IMHO, in Texas and Florida. Both states have provisions that protect the business owner from liability. While all the Tennessee bills are quite short and to the point, they don't go far enough in my opinion.

Sorry to have been so lengthy here but, this is an issue that is very near and dear to me. Because the restaurant bill impacts ALL permit holders it was the priority. This bill does not impact all of us because some of us don't work for an employer who bans your right to self protection.

Now that the restaurant bill is law, (and hopefully will not suffer the same fate as it did last year), I would hope that full attention and support can be thrown behind this issue. The restaurant issue does not effect me in the same manner this issue does. I can always find another restaurant to eat at, finding another job is not quite as feasable and I don't have much choice about the fact that I have to go there every day, several days a week.

As a couple of earlier posts have suggested, I would like to see some form of group put together to work on this type of legislation. It certainly should include at least one member of our Senate and one from the House. Both who are willing to push such a bill with as much effort as was put behind the restaurant bill.

HB3141 by Mike McDonald was heard this past March in the House Judiciary Criminal Practices sub-committee. That sub-committee moved the bill to summer study. I believe that essentially will kill the bill. But the committee members who spoke against the bill talked like they had never studied this legislation before. That is nothing short of a crock. Last years summer study of Josh Evans bill brought out considerable discussion. SO with that said, I would ask that when the date of the summer study is announced, we get as many TFA members we can in Nashville. The summer study format is pretty open. All you have to do is notify the committee clerk that you want to speak. I certainly plan to be there, Lord willin' and the creek don't rise.

[Ron W]

I work at a gun-free institution, excepting sercurity. While talking with a security police officer re: the no-gun policy, he said that their security dept worked under State law and was not there to enforce the institution's policies. He said that they would never search the locked vehicle or ask to search a vehicle of an employee unless they had a legal "probable cause" search warrant to do so. It was also his opinion that HCP holders should be able to carry their weapons and that such would enhance security. He implied that a "don't ask, don't tell" policy would probably work for legally armed employees. But officialdom prefers unarmed victim status for employees and visitors....as do criminals and tyrants.

[RobertNashville]

I'm sure it's a case by case (as in business by business) issue.

My employer clearly states that all persons, bags, vehicles, etc. are subject to search (employees or visitors).

Certainly, a person can refuse to be searched but you had better be prepared to lose your job (or leave the premises immediately if you aren't an employee).

Our security force does on occasion search bags, briefcases, coats, etc. However, as far as I know, no vehicle has ever been searched.

[tnxdshooter]

[RobertNashville]

[tnxdshooter]

[GKar]

@Sky King: I'v watched the September summer session several times. As I recall, at least one legislator stated during the public discussion that he would be willing to place language into the bill addressing the liability issue. How have other states addressed the liability concerns - or have they? From what you've learned, are there unusual/unique aspects of Tennessee law that make the liability issue more difficult here? FedEx's stance is quite clear...however, their presentation in the Sept session was almost laughable. After hearing what was (I guess) supposed to be their emotion-evoking portion, I was left sitting in my chair thinking "And what does THAT have to do with the price of eggs in China??" If we ban guns, that will somehow prevent boxcutters from being used as weapons??

[Sky King]

[TacticaLogic]

@Sky King... I like your screen name! Most people are too young to remember:


and yes, it's gun related:


They'll just have to do their own research...


Mike

[David Lewis]

"I remember bein' buck toothed and skinny, Writin' fan letters to Sky's niece, Penny..."

Jimmy Buffet, I Wish I Had A Pencil-Thin Moustache

[Sky King]

[RobertNashville]

As mentioned, “decriminalization” is not really an issue nor would it help to take that step and stop there because for many “employee” parking lots it’s not posted at all but rather a matter of company policy which means it’s a condition of employment which means that if you violate that (or any other policy) you can be disciplined up to and including termination.

Now, based on some previous posts in this thread, being fired doesn’t seem to be a big deal to some but I would say that many if not most of us don’t look forward to losing our jobs; especially in a depressed economy and/or if we are close but not quite ready for retirement!

While I started this thread it was specifically regarding employee parking lots. However, as I’ve through about it more I’ve come to the conclusion that we need to think in broader terms than that.

If you’ve read my posts you’ll see that I’m a pretty staunch supporter of property rights including the right of a business/other legally recognized entity to control what happens on their property (including whether to allow or not allow firearms on their property). However, when it comes to such things as parking lots, I think the option to disallow firearms in a vehicle, whether by “posting” or by employer policy), is significantly overreaching and an unnecessary infringement on our right to go armed and be able to defend ourselves. Other than political expediency or to placate anti-gun folks, there really is no logical basis why any parking lot should be off limits to armed citizens – no one, be it an employer, school, government entity, park commission, or anyone else should be able to effectively “disarm” us if, for whatever reason, we need or want to park our vehicles in a parking lot because such restrictions don’t just affect us while in that parking lot but from the moment we leave our homes until we return even if that “one” parking lot is just one of many stops we need to make that day.

What I’m saying then is that what we need to be working for is to make the law clear that if a person can otherwise legally carry and/or transport a firearm in their vehicle they can ALWAYS and AUTOMATICLLY be able to do so and leave their firearm in their vehicle while parked in ANY parking lot and that no private property owner can post or as a matter of “policy” restrict that ability.

I’m sure this can be done and written in such a way that the business/entity in question (that owns the parking lot) doesn’t have to assume any special/additional liability.

This may be too big a bit to do in one legislative session but I think it’s part of what we should be working for.

[Sky King]

[tnroadrunner]

Sky King reminds me of the other people like, Gaby Hayes, Hoot Gibson, Black Bart, Lash LaRue, Bob Steele, and a lot more which I am having a senior moment.

[Baron_One]

I am also a student at Austin Peay, so this isuue is dear to me. I live in Madison; so, I have a 50 minute commute to and from campus. It really bothers me that the cuurent laws deny my right to self defense at those times. Here is one more tool to help us in this fight for our rights: Students for Concealed Carry on Campus; you can find them here

http://concealedcampus.org/

I hope this helps.

[fbeaulieu]

About 10 years ago, I wrote and attempted to submit to the Tennessee legislature, a very, very similar bill .
Representative Curry Todd tried to help as did a representative Ben West from Nashville. Long story short, it never was brought to or certainly never moved out of committee....trashed to be clear.

Many, many days, weeks, months of efforts went into this attempt to do the right thing....all to be ultimately defeated by big business influence. The same exact big business thing happened again this past year to this same bill HB 3141/ SB 3009 and " the right thing to do ".... was never considered ; so , after numerous attempts to get the bill passed, the same thing happens year after year. Why ?

Frustrating to say the least and some will never understand the importance of this bill ....until it is too late....until those same folks have a flat tire at 0200 on the interstate in Memphis and the thugs pull over to help with your flat tire.

Can you say "s c r e w e d "...or " d e a d " ?

We must help Rep . McDonald and any other legislator involved to get this bill passed next year.