Worriedman

Could it be that English is his second language, and that he is actually doing a pretty decent job of speaking it. Listened to Schwarzenegger lately? Very similar to the Dutch and Germans that I have worked with.

Life, since the late 80's.

The recent elections in Massachusetts, New Jersey and Virginia had not occurred yet. A mood across the Nation seems to signify a knowledge that to stem the tide of left moving initiatives, conservatism needs to make a comeback? The message appears to be gaining volume. We can only hope.

Well, no better time for a case to deal with this issue than right after the Anointed One slapped SCOTUS around in his supposed State of the Union Address last night. I suspect he simply entrenched the Conservative portion with his antics.

Trespass offenses. In Tennessee, a person commits criminal trespass “who, knowing the person does not have the owner’s effective consent to do so, enters or remains on property, or a portion thereof.â€T.C.A. § 39-14-405. That person commits aggravated criminal trespass if he or she “intends, knows, or is reckless about whether such person’s presence will cause fear for the safety of another.â€T.C.A. § 39-14-406. “Any person who drives, parks, stands, or otherwise operates a motor vehicle on, through or within a parking area, driving area or roadway located on privately owned property which is provided for use by patrons, customers or employees of business establishments upon such property, or adjoining property or for use otherwise in connection with activities conducted upon such property, or adjoining property, after such person has been requested or ordered to leave the property or to cease doing any of the foregoing actions†is guilty of the offense of trespass by motor vehicle. T.C.A. § 39-14-407. 39-14-405. Criminal trespass. — (a) A person commits criminal trespass who, knowing the person does not have the owner's effective consent to do so, enters or remains on property, or a portion thereof. Knowledge that the person did not have the owner's effective consent may be inferred where notice against entering or remaining is given by: (1) Personal communication to the person by the owner or by someone with apparent authority to act for the owner; (2) Fencing or other enclosure obviously designed to exclude intruders; (3) Posting reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders; or (4) Posting the property, in accordance with the requirements of § 70-4-106((1)((ii). ( It is a defense to prosecution under this section that: (1) The property was open to the public when the person entered and remained; (2) The person's conduct did not substantially interfere with the owner's use of the property; and (3) The person immediately left the premises upon request. © For purposes of this section, “enter†means intrusion of the entire body. (d) Criminal trespass is a Class C misdemeanor. Always looking to learn more. My original thought was that as this started as a question under hunting, and appeared the OP was questioning the applicable laws relative to keeping folks off his recently purchased land to make it safe for him and his children to walk about without fear of being shot, the Chapter 70 standards seemed reasonable as even Criminal Trespass references them as a manner to achieve the ends seemingly desired.

Here is the legaleeze: http://www.state.tn.us/twra/pdfs/permission.pdf a. Approved signs must be placed along the property boundary at intervals no greater than 100 yards and at all major entrances. b. Approved signs must be visible at all major points of ingress and must be accompanied by fluorescent visual markings which markings must also be placed at fifty-yard (50 yd) intervals around the perimeter of the lands being posted. Such fluorescent visual markings must be at least one inch (1”) wide and four inches (4”) long. The division of forestry, in cooperation with the department of agriculture and the wildlife resources agency, shall determine a unique universal paint color or colors, including the color blue, to be used for these property boundary markings.

Outside of government workers, no one gets to "accept" the contract on Social Security, it is pushed down the workers throats. There is going to be a huge uprising of anger when the folks who are of the right age group, and are loosing their jobs during the "recession" we are now in, find out that their SS benefits are held to a 10 year average, and that if you are out of work, and do not pay in enough "quarters" prior to retirement or becoming disabled, you have no benefits whatsoever. My wife ran a day care for 18 years, payed the full ride of 16% self employment tax, then decided to go back to college and get her nursing degree once we became empty nestors. At the end of 5 years of school, and passing her boards, she got hit with end renal failure due to polycystic kidney disease, requiring dialysis. Complication of the disease prevented her from going to work, and when we approached SS for disability, we got the nice letter from the Feds which stated that she was not eligible, as she had not worked for the last 5 years, nor was the dollar amount she had paid in returnable, some illegal needed that more. They do not ask the average person to sign a contract to join the ranks of SS payers, it is a forced Ponzie scheme.

My contention is the problem with clarity is not with the Law as written, but rather the ambiguity is in the Alcoholic Beverage Commission's management of the definitions of Bars and Restaurants. That is why a "Clean Bill" is so necessary. I personally, and most thinking people, know that the amount of money that is passed around by the liqueur lobby is so large as to preclude an even playing field that deals in the facts, and that the "Hospitality" group can and does fund a strike force against us that is going to be very hard to surmount. In speaking to an employee of the ABC this weekend, his statement that he is in the direct employment of the "Liqueur Lobby' while probably factual, is very troubling.

Uh, seems like that has been happening with regularity as of late. Embedding FBI agents with our troops in the sand box to read captured combatants their rights, giving terrorist lawyers upon their arrest, allowing them our rights when they try to blow our planes up. 9-11 plotters being tried in civilian courts in the city they hit. Corporations like CNN, NBC, and GE fawning over the Anointed One, spending money and air time on him like drunken sailors. Hopefully you were being sarcastic, if not, you are clueless! Uh oh, double tap with Straight Shooter's post. I had to redo mine a couple of times to ratchet it down.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : flsenate.gov From 790.06.12... any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises, which portion of the establishment is primarily devoted to such purpose. Basically, Florida allows carry in restaurants that serve, but perimt holdrs are not allowed to carry in the "area" i.e. bar area if the restaurant has one. Bars and night clubs are off limits for carry. No carry and consumption. Compilation of Links and Information for Everything Conceal Carry - Florida Concealed Carry Forums

God help us, where is the "Dreaded Red X" when you need it? Clearly an egregious violation of the 8th Amendment there!

I would be very interested in knowing what the "curriculum" is for the program. Is it State mandated? Do all the different systems get direction as to the things they attempt to teach?

Expound please, which candidates do you perceive as giving lip service to the 2nd Amendment for political gain?

Be ready for Emanuel to throw out the full court press. I turned over to MSMBC to watch the crying, and heard Chris Mathews spewing about how Emanuel had to do the "heavy lifting" to get Health Care Reform shoved through, opining that if the they failed to get it passed, every Democrat was in danger of loosing their seats this next November???? Is he from the same planet as the rest of us? I hope they name him Chairman of the DNC.

75% in, 53-46 Brown, AP has called the race.

A "Right" is simply a promise about an explicit situation by the framers of both the US and Tennessee Constitutions against government action. It is on us that we have not forced the government to leave our "Rights" alone. We are sheep, and it is only going to get worse. It will soon be speech that will be restricted, and in the end, freedom to worship as one sees fit. Over 30 other States allow guns in bars, restaurants or whatever you want to call them. It is not a problem in those locations, it would not be a problem here. As long as we refuse to grow a set and demand our "Rights" as intended by the Founders, we will have what we deserve.

A clean bill, stating that Handgun Carry Permit holders are allowed to carry anywhere alcohol is served is what we need. We will not get it with this legislature. Too many of the sitting members are ignorant of the Constitution, lack the backbone to uphold it if they do understand it, or simply believe that they are above the oath they took to uphold it, and whatever it says is irrelevant. It is simple really, the Second Amendment says that we have the Right to keep and bear arms, there is no specification stating “except where alcohol is served”. That right is not to be infringed. The Tenth Amendment says if it is not delegated to the Federal Government, it is in the purvey of the States to deal with the wearing of arms. Our Tennessee Constitution in Article 1, Section 26 states that we as Citizens have a Right to bear arms for our defense, however the Legislature has power, by law to restrict the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime. As the law here already says that we can not be in possession of a weapon and be under the influence of any alcohol, there is already a restriction on the mixing of alcohol and guns, for the permit holder. Our State Constitution precludes the Legislature from passing laws relative to the wearing of arms without proving that it would reduce crime. There is sufficient empirical data to prove that the carrying of arms by licensed holders in venues that serve alcohol is not a problem, Senator Jackson alluded to this in his speech prior to the override vote, but due to it being an election year, he is now afraid to stand up for the truth. The people we elect should uphold the Constitutions, they swore an oath or made an affirmation to do so. There is no section of that oath that says “as long as it suits my political agenda”. I had a City Council member in Union City tell me “the Second Amendment don’t mean what it used to”. As long as We the People allow individuals such as this to occupy the seats of Legislative bodies, we will continue to loose our liberties. They either need to step up, or step aside, and we are at fault if we do not spend every waking minute to change their actions, or their vocations, if they will not adhere to the law.

Remove the targets. Dodd is tainted, and in a heads up race will lose, so they pull him, do a Tanner and give him a posh appointment in return for faithful service and put up a more "concervative" Dem candidate and keep the seat for the party. Never forget, Obama is a master politician.

McDonald vs. Chicago will answer that, for good or ill. If SCOTUS incorporates the 2nd Amendment to the States, it will be hard to deny an individual Right to gun ownership, if it goes the other way, this nation is doomed.

At least we have the opportunity to carry legally. If the rest of the 95% desires to remain a soft target, or to carry illegally, so be it. If we could just get the Legislature to understand the Constitution as written, and then the sheep to hold them to the protecting and defending it as they should, we could have our Right to Keep and Bear arms as described in that said Constitution.

Those are statistics provided by the State of Tennessee. The math is a simple computation of the figures provided by the TBI and the State. That is not what I said, I simply applied a formula which reached the fact that: The cites from the Official State sites are not something "I read" on the internet, but research of data provided by the Government, with respect to acts that would result in revocation of a Handgun Carry permit. You touted: I asked you to show your data, which so far you have not done. The rules for the successful application for a HCP are published, if an individual who does not fit the rules applies, I do not think those who have committed an act that would preclude them from legally obtaining a permit should be counted against the honest, legal class of holders.

If you will open the cites above my work, you will find the number on permit holders is for one year, not 4. I am not one of those that beat on LEO's, I support them in every way I can, so you can take that chip off your shoulder. But it is a fact that the HCP holder as a class IS more likely to abide by the law than the general public. Do a little reading on the sites above my math, you will find it to be correct. All the figures come directly from them, and are current for the year 2008, the latest stats available.

They only lobbied against the Public Option, they love the mandated purchase feature, and the fact there will be rationing, premiums go up, they pay out less. Best of all worlds for them.

Check the stock prices of publicly held insurance companies over the last month. Insurance Co.'s and Big Pharma are the huge winners here! But you are right to be skeptical of the post. None now. Just for those who have a job. Just those with jobs, or retirement benefits.

Cite your statistics please. http://www.tbi.state.tn.us/Info%20Systems%20Div/TIBRS_unit/Publications/2008%20Crime%20in%20Tennessee.pdf http://www.state.tn.us/safety/stats/DL_Handgun/Handgun/HandgunReport2008Full.pdf http://www.tennessee.gov/safety/handgun/qualifications.htm There were 218,004 Handgun Carry Permit Holders on 1/1/2009, in the State of Tennessee. For the calendar year 2008, there were a total of exactly 607 permits suspended or revoked. Therefore, 0.278% of permits were at least suspended for crime or other reasons last year. Suspensions can be temporary; the actual number of permits revoked was 263 which is 0.1206% of the total number of permits at the end of the year, that's less than 1/8 of 1%. In the same time period, there were 47,315 arrests for Domestic Violence, 236 for Stalking, 29,387 for DUI plus 2,843 for Weapon Law Violations in the state during the same time period. With an estimated population of 6,214,888, that means that at least 1.28% of the total population committed crimes that would result in revocations of a permit. In essence the General Population was 1061% more likely to commit an offence of such a magnitude that would result in revocation of a permit, than the HCP Holder as a group. Included in this is the fact that failure to pay child support results in revocation of a permit, but the numbers of that infraction are not included in the crime rate statistics on the General Population, were that to be the case, the order of magnitude would be much higher.