Tennessee Firearms Assoc. Inc.

What should it be?

Do we push for "Arizona style" carry or a more conservative approach addressing the prohibited places?

I think that we should approach the next Legislative session by going after removal of local municipalities ability to "Opt Out" of Parks Carry, and if anything on top of that, go for the "Parking Lot" Bill.

We will have to wait for a more Conservative Speaker to get the "Arizona" style carry.

I concur. I would focus on removing the local option, doing so gives us complete park carry in this state, no exceptions.

Followed by neutering posted no guns signs. Let them put the sign up, simply remove all legal penalty for ignoring it.

I would like parking lots, but until we get #2 I don't see parking lots.

[quote="C. Richard Archie"]I think that we should approach the next Legislative session by going after removal of local municipalities ability to "Opt Out" of Parks Carry, and if anything on top of that, go for the "Parking Lot" Bill

Parks would be my first choice.It was a mistake to allow council members to decide anything when they dont know the difference between The Constitution and constipation.
Butch Butler

I'll have to agree with the rest here. Not so much what we would like to do, but what we can realistically
expect to pass.
Parks, schools, employer parking lots. Removing the mall restriction would be nice as well, tho not likely.

Like the councilman / constitution/ constipation thing. Dead on!

Grunt,

What "mall restriction" are you talking about?

It isn't a special mall exemption, you are talking about places that are posted.

A Vermont/Arizona carry law would be nice. Clearing up the vagueness in the posting requirement would be nice. Removing the "opt out" provision in the parks carry law would be nice. HOWEVER, I can always CHOOSE another restaurant if the one I go to is posted. I can find another place to walk and have a pic-nic if the park is posted. AND I am not going to give up my permit (unless a Vermont/Arizona carry law abolishes the permit) because other states that do not have an Arizona/Vermont law will still require a permit when I visit there.

What I CAN NOT do (realistically) is just quit my job and find another if my current employer will not allow me to provide for my own protection during my commute.

In the years past, in several sessions, bills have been introduced that would offer employees protection from termination or disciplinary action if they keep their legal handgun in their car while parked on employers parking lot. They have never received the support and attention needed to get them passed.
Also, bills introduced in the past have never offered any protection for the employer for liability which has always been a major concern in their objection to these bills. About 15 other states have such protection and many have withstood court challenges. Their laws also include the liability protection that needs to be included in any bills introduced in Tennessee if we ever want to see them progress.

Over the years, I have written countless emails, made phone calls and traveled to Nashville several times to support this legislation. With the exception of a VERY few people, and John Harris spoke at a committee hearing on one of the bills, we havn't had much support on these bills and I am beginning to feel a bit alone on this one.

The restaurant bill and the parks bill, I got on the band wagon for those. I wrote the letters, I spoke before the Memphis City Council and Shelby County Commission asking them to NOT opt out of the parks law. I traveled to Nashville and personally visited every representative from Shelby County a few years ago concerning a pending restaurant bill. Now I am asking YOU ALL to get behind THIS bill. It is important.

While this bill will not impact as many permit holders as the restaurant and parks bill did, at least there are options in those situations. For those that a parking lot bill will help, there is NO option. We have NO relief.

For those of you who are not subject to disciplinary actions or termination in this situation, I am glad, you need to appreciate your situation. For those of us who ARE subject to punitive action, we NEED this. We only have three options, 1) quit our job and seek other employment, 2) carry it anyway and risk being fired, or 3) get the protection we need in the law. Personally, options 1and 2 are not really options.

For us to have a chance at the "Parking Lot" Bill, it will take someone with close ties to Haslam pushing for such an action. It is apparent that he drove the ascension of Harwell to the speakers role, and if he does not choose to back this, it will not get out of committee.

Either that road to fruition, or, a mass of pressure by Representatives, (which I doubt will be forthcoming, as that would go against the precepts of the leadership) will be required. The Speaker has made it well known that she is not of a mind to consider ANY "gun" legislation during her tenure. The pressure put on the caucus by Moderate forces to appear "Middle of the Road" in their choice of leadership, which I suspect the upper management (including ex-governors, sitting Federal Senators etc.) is fully in tune with, was brought to bear to distance the Republican Party from any semblance of support for expanding 2nd Amendment issues.

Haslam did say if we got Constitutional Legislation related to firearms on his desk, he would sign it. He did not portend to back, further or support it's introduction or movement through the Legislature however.

If we can get it on the House floor, it has a chance of passage. I suspect the Senate would be a lot easier sell.

Yes, Haslam said he would back it if it made it to his desk. All he has to do is keep it from his desk and he doesn't have to risk being a liar, like Bredeson. Richard, I think you nailed it as to who got Harwell the Speakership, he needed a moderate he could use easier.

"For us to have a chance at the "Parking Lot" Bill, it will take someone with close ties to Haslam pushing for such an action. "

Ok, I can deal with that. Give me a name of someone close to Haslam who would be open minded about this and I will be glad to contact them and work with them. Even if they aren't open minded, I will still be glad to contact them and at least attempt to sway him or her. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

I'm in agreement with Sky King, we need to work on the parking lot bill - keeping in mind that there are a lot of permit holders who are either Local, State, and Federal employees so lets not forget us/them in the proposed language when the bill comes up for consideration in committee. We need to also remind our legislators that this is indeed a parking lot bill - and not a bill that will allow Tennessee permit holders to carry firearms in either places of employment and/or government buildings where they may already be prohibited. This is a bill that will allow law-abiding permit holders to possess a firearm in a locked vehicle on employer property for the sole purpose regarding protection of the employee while they travel to/from the place of employment. The liberals will likely spin this bill completely out of proportion, so we need to stay on target with the message of Constitutionally-guaranteed personal protection of oneself and one's familty.

Also keep in mind that there are many more "R's" in the upcoming Legislature than in the previous one. So that would seem to solidify (I'm making an assumption here) support of Second Amendment Rights in any upcoming legislation that has the potential to be vetoed. The parking lot bill has my support as a primary focus for TFA activities in 2011.

My second recommendation for a call to action would be for the removal of the opt-out provision for local parks. I'm blessed in that my city and county did not opt out of this provision, however, there are a number of local parks in adjacent counties where carry by permit is still illegal.

Just my $0.02.

Just a thought on the parking lot bill:

We might not want to even make it a gun bill. Make it a freedom bill, write Tennessee law to consider a vehicle an extension of the home with all rights and what not pursuant, and then a clause protecting them from being required to allow it to be searched as a condition of employment, etc. It would have the advantage of helping to protect our 4th A rights, as well as our 2A rights. When the bill is attacked we would have more reasons to support, and it shows the enemies as the freedom hating bigots they are.

Parking lot and park bills would be nice. Ultimatly I would like to see a law that sais any place that is open to the public is open to carry. If you dont want anybody carrying then make your establishment "members only".

I would also like to see a 5 year HCP that expires concurrent to your drivers license. For some this may increase the short term cost as they may have to renew for 2 or 3 years just to do it again early to get it on the 5 year track but it lowers the cost of the HCP in the long run. I would also like to see the same rules applied for HCP that the state applies to drivers license for those on active duty not stationed in TN. You HCP would be good as long as you are on active duty and would expire like 90 days after seperation. I think these would be good bills to "test the water" with the upcoming session.

As far as non gun issues I would like to see the same rules applied to military spouces that apply to military members. Right now the soldier can be stationed anywhere in the world and as long as he in active duty his DL wont expire but his spouse still has to get a new one every 5 years.