Chief Serpas claims TFA attempts to intimidate gun carrying

[johnharris]

[Tim Nunan]

Outstanding!!! Free advertising.

[KevinMcCauley]

Nice work, John. Serpas is a disgrace.

[redbarron06]

Yesturday they were all about running thier soup suckers and today that are crawfishing back into a corner. Hey guess what when you stand there in uniform then you are making a public statement about what ever is there. Now they want to back out when they find out that over 200,000 citizens, taxpayers, and voters are upset.

I would like to know how many of them were standing infront of the mayor or thier home town getting the 3rd degree this morning.

[johnharris]

Our job is to make sure that every mayor, county administrator, local council person, etc., knows that gun owners are upset about these law enforcement officers using either using taxpayer money to pursue personal agendas and/or taking time away from law enforcement duties to wear their uniforms and look "official" and "on duty" to advocate the veto of a bill that the general assembly has worked on for 15 years.

Yes, the objective is to burn up the phone lines, emails, etc., of these local elected officials relative to the conduct of these primarily appointed public officials engaging in "policy making" which they were not elected or appointed to do rather than "law enforcement" which is their job.

[ProguninTN]

I hope Chief Serpas is intimidated. I'm all for angry citizens contacting their Chiefs and expressing their displeasure with Serpas et al for their interference with their rights under Article I Section 26.

[C. Richard Archie]

Don't know how wide spread the reaction to this is, but in The Jackson Sun, there is a blurb in the "State briefs" section, "Nashville: Police Chief raises concerns over gun group email." I would imagine it is the standard that went out to every paper in the State. Nothing else in the paper about the veto.

[johnharris]

I typically check the CommercialAppeal, the JacksonSun, the Knoxnews, the TimesFreePress and the Tennessean for articles. Most of them carried at least the base AP story but several carried much more. What is even more interesting - at least to me - is monitoring the reader commentaries to measure how the information, even as filtered through these reporters, is being perceived by people in the public.

Also important is that every major news paper in Tennessee is reporting that the TENNESSEE FIREARMS ASSOCIATION is standing up to law enforcement in Tennessee on this issue.

[David Lewis]

Nothing sinister about wanting to know the names of the opposition, despite Chief Serpas' intimations to the contrary.
All we're doing is exercising yet another of those pesky rights enumerated & recognized in the Bill of Rights.

Let's see: it's OK for the Communist Appeal to publish the names & other information of all people who hold a Handgun Carry
Permit, but not OK for TFA to do the same regarding public officials at a public gathering held in a public building?

Hmmmm....

What was it Orwell said? "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."

Guess Animal Farm must be Chief Serpas' favorite book.

David

[David Lewis]

Another thought:

Last time I checked, there were checkpoints through which visitors to the Capitol must pass upon entry.

If all those uniformed officers present at the veto-fest were on duty and present in their offical capacities
while performing their duties (and the great majority of them were a long way from their jurisdictions--and,
I'd be quite interested to know just what those official duties might have been...perhaps serving a warrant
on the Governor?), then they should have been allowed past the checkpoints.

If, however, they were off duty, yet in uniform and wearing sidearms while participating in a political
event, then they should have been disarmed at the checkpoints, just as every other citizen would have been.

So, which is it?

On duty--and therefore in violation of sections of TCA prohibiting such behaviour? or,

Off duty--and therefore in violation of other sections of TCA?


David

[backwoodsman]

so where it should not be an infringement to list and publish for anyone including criminals to see the name and address of an individual possessing a handgun carry permit,in the eye's of the police chief's it is none of the public tax payer's business when poilce lobby against gun-rights on the tax payer's dime? is that what i'm seeing? did i get that right? , this just smacks of complete communism!! or more like dictatorship!!!, it's time to write bredesen again, or perhaps the attorney general, D.C. politic's have made their way down to the state level, I'm ready for any rally to be hosted, then brings this outrage to light

[ProguninTN]

[backwoodsman]

i sent this to all of metro council and bredesen, i guess i'll have to call the attorney general he had no email link,:

I would like to know the exact reason why officer's in uniform including the metro chief of police showed up in uniform to engage and lobby for the veto of the restaurant carry bill!!, Under the statute's concerning an officer's duty i could not find a single statute supporting this type of behavior,for one sworn to protect and serve to actually while on the tax payer's dollar, lobby against the people's second amendment rights,is an utter and complete outrage! They can't make it to a crime on time because they're paid anti-gun lobbyist, paid by the tax payer!!!, This is totally and completely unacceptable!Then to further spew propaganda as if gun owner's are about to become vigilante gun-toting drunks,is just pure rhetoric!! For all those unable to read as I know many federal and state bill's are passed and or vetoed without the elected officials ever reading them, there is a strict stipulation stating no alcohol whatsoever may be consumed by an individual with a permit while carrying anywhere at anytime!! Please feel free to actually read the bill.I expect our money to provide uninterrupted support from our police ,not paid time outs while lobbying for the anti-gun left!The citizen's of Nashville expect due course in this matter,formal reprimand and loss of pay and reminder of duty! Thank you, and good day


Constitutional Patriot
Barry Cash

[JayC]