Tennessee Firearms Assoc. Inc.

The Senate Judiciary took up Senator Doug Jackson's SB 1127 (cosponsored by Sen. Mark Norris) which is the Senate version of the HB0962 (Rep. Todd) on restaurant carry. After a lengthy debate, the Senate Judiciary voted 7-2 to pass the bill out of committee without the curfew and without the age restricted language.

It is expected that this version will be on the Senate floor within 2 weeks and that it will pass with strong support.

Good Job

Good Deal

According to the website it still has the age restriction, is this just a lag between updates?

The website is not current.

Take a look at the Senate Judiciary video on Aug 8. About 1 hour 9 minutes in and you will hear Doug Jackson introducing his amendment that was written in committee and passed.

http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInf ... ber=sb1127

Click on "Video Clips" and then SB1127 (continued)

Will the issue regarding the definition of restaurant be an issue? It would seem this may still leave bars off-limits, and an area that would let places me be declared bars, regardless of true status.

I want to see the text of the approved amendment and talk with Jackson about it.

That restaurant definition doesn't seem needed.

That is my feeling.....

When I speak with my Sen, should I ask him to push for stripping off the definition, and under what basis? (Not needed is my best line.)

I would wager we can get a very good bill through the Senate. What gets me, is why is it so hard to use the old bill this time around?

I think the approach is that the definition of restaurant is confusing because unless there is signage of some type a permit holder will not know if the restaurant is a "restaurant" or not.

[quote="johnharris"]I think the approach is that the definition of restaurant is confusing because unless there is signage of some type a permit holder will not know if the restaurant is a "restaurant" or not.[/quote]

It may or may not be needed, but I'd rather keep the language and have my back covered to stay out of trouble. (I am aware of some establishments which primarily serve alcohol but also have food which could confuse a person who had never been there.)

John,

I contacted my representative (64th - Ty Cobb [D]) via e-mail on 27MAR09, asking him to stand fast regarding HB0962, and to push for a clean bill with no amendments. I received a short e-mail reply today at 15:49H-Romeo:
******************
"Mike:

Thanks for your e-mail.

This bill would not have passed without the curfew so rather than see it fail we thought it best to pass it with curfew."
******************
Not exactly an in-depth explanation, but at least he sent a reply. Was this truly the case? or was it just a case of no one having the backbone to shoulder the cause of stripping out the amendments?

Now... If that truly was the case, and the Senate approved companion bill passes on that side and gets sent back the the House, what are your thoughts on the possibility of the House accepting? Will we be another year without restaurant carry? Will we have to crank up the pressure to the redline to get them to accept the Senate version or would it be a waste of time? You have a better line of sight on this than most of us, and we value your opinions very much...

Thanks,
Mike

Mike

I think we need a big push in the Senate to make sure it is not a close vote - which I do not think will be the case but let's not risk it.

Then, we need to start now on a big push in the House. Keep in mind that in 2005 we had 66 House sponsors on a bill with no restrictions. We lost some of those sponsors and have picked up others. I do feel that some House members were concerned about seeing the bill killed in committee without the restrictions and that "words" were given which restrained them from stripping the restriction on the floor - (how else do you explain the Kelsey vote?) If the Senate passes and sends it back, we may loose a few votes but I still think we will not loose 20.

It goes to Calender I guess next week, then the week after the Senate floor I take it?

Do we want to push for any further changes, such as removal of the restaurant definition?

I want to talk with some House members, including Curry Todd, to see if stripping it any more will cause Todd to withdraw the bill.

Can't we over-rule Todd on the motion to pull the bill?

With the number of sponsors and other interested parties, technically probably yes. However, as with the recall motion in 2005 the legislators are hesitant to do so because such procedural moves are uncommon and unfavored.