Parks and Longarms for Permit holders

[johnharris]

Both of these bills passed the House today.

Unfortunately, neither are optimal.

The longarms bill was watered down from the House version to expressly prohibit having a round chambered. The round can be in the longarm but it cannot be chambered. What real difference does that make if the person in possession can have a chambered round in the pistol?

On the parks - I really hate this one. Local governments can by RESOLUTION (one reading - doesn't mean crap and no real requirement for public hearing) on a majority vote close a local park. Who do you want to thank for that one, I am told several Republican senators who represent in their law practices local governments. There aught to be hell to pay for that betrayal and there hopefully will be......

[falcon1]

[johnharris]

Off the record I suspect it was Senators Faulk, Overbey and/or Stanley but I want to talk to each of them. If anyone is in their districts - call and check. I am certain it was not Jackson or Beavers. I don't think it was Kyle or Marrero. Not sure about Black or Bunch.

[GGUNSHOP]

John,

On the signage in the parks bill, the signage has to be the same size and verbage contained in 39-11-1311? Correct?

Thanks

Phillip Arrington
Goodlettsville Gun Shop
602 S. Main St
Goodlettsville Tn 37072
615-859-8822
ggunshop@bellsouth.net
http://www.goodlettsvillegunshop.com

[johnharris]

Yes but its going to be a mess because of they way it was amended. I remain of the opinion that the only appropriate step was to make all parks open without local option. When it appeared local option was "the preference" of those who get to vote, the best we could do was default rule of open and make them close it.

As for the signs, they will remain up at state and federal parks because of the "fiscal note" even though permit holders are allowed in them (in time). Theory is that cops and permit holders will all know we are exempt and that the property is either a STATE or after Feb 2010 a federal park.

However, the same signs on local parks will be effective against permit holders. So a permit holder will have to know a) that its a local park, b) that the sign may be effective and c) whether there is a local "resolution" on that specific park to render it closed. Who wants to compile that list?

Its a total mess because legislators would not hold the line on local parks and refused to go along with local governments. What this ultimately means is that the locals will start closing parks and hopefully it will provide enough of a turmoil with permit holders being charged and loosing firearms to forfeitures that they will get off of their butts and demand that the local parks be completely pre-empted by the state.

[JayC]

John,

Do when know when WMAs will be addressed? Also, if this passes will NF's which are also listed as WMAs be safe to carry or still closed?

[johnharris]

I believe WMA's are in a separate bill that Rep. Bell has. I would need to double check on that.

[ProguninTN]

[johnharris]

Yes, nothing can be in the chamber ASSUMING THE governor DOES NOT VETO IT AS WELL.

[ProguninTN]

[redbarron06]

Has anybody heard the latest on this? Has anybody heard wether or not Phil B plans on swinging the veto hammer on this too? 10 days from the day of sighning would end up being Saturday if my math is correct (not including Sundays or the day the bill was signed)

[backwoodsman]

well naifeh sort of spoke up for the gov saying you can expect more vetoes on any gun bill, i dont know if he was revealing insider information or just fluffin his feathers out doing a strut

[redbarron06]

well we will see, he has this bill and the Firearms Freedom Act waiting for him.

How late can he wait to veto it and we not get a chance to over ride it?

[Tim Nunan]

[redbarron06]

Have we heard anything on the govenors actions on these two bills. If I did the math correctly these will go into law without his signatrure tomorrow.

[bdawg998]

[n24wheel]

This will not effect the National Forest. MY bill HB961 by Rep Bell/Sen Burchett is the bill that addresses it. Right now it is placed behind the budget becasue of a 200 dollar fiscal note the TWRA would not take out.

David

[C. Richard Archie]

How do we go about changing the status of the TWRA fiscal note, is there any pressure that can be leveraged there?

Would a call to have the hunters of the State to contact them have any chance of success in changing their stance?

[n24wheel]

Hunters calling could help. Last year the hunters calling the TWRC in support of this bill swayed them to support the bill. That is why the fiscal note came down to only a few hundred dollars instead of thousands......well that and the fact that they admitted to not having any data to back the fiscal note up.

[C. Richard Archie]

Can you give us the proper office to call?

One of the things that I find somewhat irritating from the TWRA is their low profile, only time we see our officers is when the do a stop and check.

It would seem to me that as they are mainly paid by the revenue generated from hunters, they would prefer to have us as allies, instead of a disenfranchised aggravated employer base. As the economy gets worse, there will be less revenue generated from hunting license sales, would appear that they would want our good will?? I would think they would want to work with us, (as they work for us) instead of the general perception that they are against us.