Fallguy

Why? They still have legislative days left. So there is time. I don't think Todd has worked on and carried this for two years to just forget about it now. I'm not sure why...but I admit there may not be enough votes for the 2/3 required to suspend the rules, but there should be more than enough for a simple majority to override the veto.

See post 42 of this thread and on from there....

I completely agree that AG opinions are just that...and are not law, precedent etc... I just offered it as relevant information. IMO (FWIW) I do think that if you are attending a school function at a park, then you probably shouldn't carry...as far as the law goes. Otherwise I don't think a whole park becomes off-limits because there is a school function going on in part of it or definitely just because school kids show up.

This has been discussed at length in several other threads..... If you saw it, it is visable. If you didn't see it (and you the PD is called and/or you are charged) you will have to make you case that it was not plainly visable to you. This is nothing different than the current/previous law. Again just like it has always been. As has been said in the other threads, we can not find anyone that has ever been charged so don't know for sure. But since it is a misdenanor, the law says you are supposed to be issued a citation in lieu of arrest [40-7-118((1)] unless you commited a certain offense under 40-7-118((2) or 40-7-1108((3) (of which 39-17-1359 is not one) or meet one of the eight criteria in 40-7-118© (see http://www.michie.com/tennessee/l)

Well I have to agree... When the media does mention posting...the just say a "No Guns" sign...and I'm sure a few places will think that is all that has to be done.

Guess it sort of goes back to all of us living in different areas around the state.... Population size etc.... Reminds me of when everyone keeps talking about the ABC doing something and I say that is fine for places that serve liquor, but in the dozens of dry counties where only beer is served, any ABC changes wouldn't mean a thing.

If the school kids weren't at the park before he got there, why should he leave it in the car? His question was about if he was there and then they arrive afterwards, in which case I said he may want to go put it in his car. But as long as we are all here.....here is another question for you. As best I can tell, the park is off-limits if it is being used by the school, not just because school kids are there. So what if it is after school hours no buses around etc....how do you know if the kids there practicing are school kids for team practice, a local little league team or just a bunch that got together?

Yes. Now even though the AG has said you could still be charged even if signs are posted...his reasoning was that a person was convicted or carry at a school, even though the school didn't have the signs posted they were supposed to. But my argument would be...all schools are off-limits by default. Parks however are legal by default and are only off-limits if voted on by the local goverment. How are you supposed to know if you are not given proper notice?

Well the rule will only become law if there is a sign with the symbol or wording as in the law. The Rule 7 - No Guns on a list of mall rules etc... will still not be a legal posting. However I agree that the way 39-17-1359 was changed is the one slight downside to this bill. But overall, at least in my area, I haven't seen many places with just a international symbol sign that would now become legal. I don't really think (again in my area) any more new places will post it now just because of the law change. Shoot outside of a restaurant owner or two in Nashville and few gun owners I doubt many people are really keeping up with this and for sure don't know the details. The whole focus in the media has been about restaurant/bars not the posting law.

You don't have to leave, but legally you probably need to disarm. The AG has said you would be legal with the handgun left in your car at park with school kids. Now what I would do is keep sitting there, eat my lunch and leave when I'm done. Not sure how anyone is going to know anything otherwise. As to whether the whole park becomes off-limits or just the immediate area around the ballfield...we will only know for sure when/if someone is ever charged and then see what the verdict is.

I know...my point was (even though it might not be legal/right) that if they saw someone coming to intervene in a family situation, they may very well draw first. Then you draw in self-defense. Shots are exchanged. Then when it goes to court (even though they may be in the wrong for drawing first) it comes out that you were getting involved in a non-crime family situation and that had you not, the other person may not have drawn.

Well it can't be the last day unless they approve the budget. But even so it's not the 90th day and I'm sure they want to get paid for all 90 days.

Guess the info got lost in all the other stuff..lol The next House Floor Session is 2:00pm tomorrow. At that time Todd should give notice that he wants to override the veto. It then has to wait 24hours before it can be voted on. So it depends on when the next house session will be after that. As of today there is nothing on the schedule except Wed, but they could set a time to come back during the session on Wed.

In fact you could, but not likely. Unless something else is going on. The AG has said a person can be charged with a violation of 39-17-1321 even within their own home. AG Opinion 98-151 There are two types of possession when it comes to the law, actual and constructive. Actual of course when something is actually in your possession, on your person etc... Constructive would be like if something is in the glovebox and you are sitting in the passenger seat. Even though you didn't actually posses it, you could easily and quickly.

If there are no signs at a local park it should be legal. I say should becaue the new law requires them to post a very specific sign as defined in 39-17-1311. However the AG has issued an opinion saying that a person could still be charged even if there aren't signs posted. If you read the opinion I think he used some bad logic, but what do I know.... As far as their still being "No Guns" signs at state parks, the law that allowed carry said signs can't be changed, that was so there wouldn't be a fiscal note that would kill the bill. AFAIK when the sign need to be replaced due to wear etc.... they can leave off the no firearms on the new sign.

Driver's License Fees $59.50 for me.....

LOL...I was sort of trying to avoid saying it like that too..... It is a bit funny.

+1 You could file the suit and ask for an injunction, but it would be the court that would issue the injunction and keep the status quo until the case is decided. Of course the court doesn't have to.

Would be bad wouldn't it?.... If they saw you as a threat for messing in family business and did draw or make refrence to a weapon, then you react, then it goes down hill...

I don't think he ever said women can't be dangerous. Just that in his opinion based on the number of women to men etc... that it would more likely be a family thing. Maybe the reason the people on the video didn't react is because they heard the girl yelling "No Mom! I don't want to go!" I don't know that, I'm just saying trying to figure out what you would do just based on the video doesn't really give you much info.

My understanding is this lawsuit will say that allowing people to carry handguns where alcohol is served will create a dangerous work enviroment for servers. Considering the previous law allowed owners and their agents to carry, 39-17-1350 allows LEOs to carry and many other states allow carrry where alcohol is served I just don't see how this suit can have any merit.

If I'm reading your post right...that is what already happened. This new bill comeplety repeals 39-17-1305. So unless posted you can carry anywhere alcohol is served, not just restaurants.

This was a teenager who didn't want to move with her family to Florida. Abducted Teen Found In Florida | WUSA9.com | Washington, DC | Just something to remember, that sometimes what you see doesn't tell you the whole story.

To be honest I'm not sure. I always thought just filed with the clerk, but I think some others have said that it has to be announced on the floor.

Yeah, I did see him in the video....I thought maybe he was waiting for the vote so he could take it right away to the house. But I do remember now the house was already adjourned at that moment. I guess one reason that there may not be anything on the schedule yet is they will wait and see how late they go Wed and then set a time to come back Thu....