Tennessee Firearms Assoc. Inc.

I just read about this...does anyone have any additional information?

From NRAILA.ORG

Right-to-Carry Ban Proposed in Belle Meade!

Please Stand Up and Make Your Voices Heard!

On Wednesday, March 17, the Belle Meade Board of Commissioners will consider a proposed ordinance (Ordinance 2010-2) that would forbid any person with a handgun carry permit to carry within the city limits.

Not only does this legislation create a victim zone inside Belle Meade by disarming law-abiding citizens, it is also a clear violation of Tennessee’s preemption statutes.

The Board of Commissioners will meet at 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday at the Belle Meade City Hall located at 4705 Harding Road.

Please make plans to attend Wednesday’s hearing and voice your opposition to Ordinance 2010-2. If you are unable to attend, please contact the Mayor, Vice-Mayor, and Board of Commissioners TODAY and respectfully urge them to oppose this illegal and ill-conceived proposal. Contact information can be found below.

Telephone: 615-297-6041
Fax: 615-297-0255

Gray O. Thornburg, Mayor
gray.odwonline@comcast.net

James V. Hunt, Sr., Vice-Mayor
jhunt@citybellemeade.org

Tom Corcoran
tcorcoran@corcoranmaddox.com

Cathy Altenbern
caltenbern@citybellemeade.org

George W. Crook
ecrook@comcast.net

How can a city law over ride a state law?

I am not an attorney but:

It seems to me that as it is illegal for an individual to "intend to go armed" anywhere in the State, sans the defense provided by the possession of a Handgun Carry Permit, I would surmise, rightly or wrongly, that a valid permit would allow the Citizen to carry even under the ordinance as crafted by the City of Belle Meade. From what I have been able to discern, all that has been done with the existing ordinance is to remove the language specific to carry of an army/navy pistol in the hand, as is in the current ordinance. Does State law not preempt local ordinances on this subject?

I appears that this may be a move directed at a specific situation, and quite possibly a specific person.

What they are doing is nowhere legal. 1308 says anywhere in the state you can have an unloaded weapon on you as long as it's not concealed. The only exception to that would be if a local reg was put in place before April 8, 1986. Since they are wanting to change it now, it would not be valid.

Matthew

From: http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/c ... de-gun-ban

Mayor dispels rumor about Belle Meade gun ban
Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 12:33am
By Sherry Phillips

After a gun rights activist walked down a Belle Meade street with a loaded pistol in his hand, the city decided it needed to clean up an outdated law on its books.

But the change has stirred a wave of opposition from gun rights groups including the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action which made a post Tuesday on its website that claimed the city was trying to ban guns.

“Not only does this legislation create a victim zone inside Belle Meade by disarming law-abiding citizens, it is also a clear violation of Tennessee’s preemption statutes,” the post read in part.

The NRA-ILA urged citizens to voice opposition to an ordinance on the Wednesday city commission agenda.

“There is a rumor going around that we are going to ban handguns, guns in the city,” said Mayor Gray Thornburg.

She said the rumor is a “complete misunderstanding.” The city is merely realigning their ordinance to be in line with state regulations.

“I know that a whole bunch of people in Belle Meade own guns, and I’m sure that there are plenty who have permits to carry,” she said. “They are absolutely right. I wouldn’t violate somebody’s Second Amendment right by banning guns.”

The purpose and the effect of this proposed law may in fact be a misunderstanding on the part of us (NRA/pro Second Amendment, etc) - if that's the case, this may be the proverbial tempest in a teapot. That said, I think this bears close scrutiny.

More importantly, I think we can clearly see the impact of what one idiot person can do when he decides to act up to the limit of his IQ.

Cut it any way you want, the city is attempting to delete an exception to the ordinance and that exception allowed open carry of a specific class of firearms. 2 steps back ...

Since the pre-emption statutes exempted laws before 1986, and they are modifying it now, wouldnt we be able to use pre-emption to hammer away at their local laws?

Either way, we can always use this as an exmaple of the weakness in our current pre-emption laws, and push next year for strengthening. We needed to strengthen them anyway to protect gun ranges, and the like. I don't exactly see this as a long term loss. Or maybe I just don't know something I ought to.