Fallguy

True enough...

You quoted...but did you read it? That is exactly what Dave said. It is only a presumption, if the DA feels that you did not or should not have had a reasonable belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury he can still charge you and possibly convict you. It just like if I see a man and woman together I may presume they are husband and wife, but that doesn't mean that is the case. All this presumption does is but the burden on the state to prove you weren't in reasonable fear instead of you having to prove you were.

I understand the frustration with the Governor...but not really the legislature. Don't forget...they are the ones that will override the veto. I really don't think the "We'll fix this in January" statement, meant they would make it legal again in January, but that they would address it when the legislature was back in session in January. Which, they did. If the end goal is to have restaurant carry...then Yes, it appears we have nothing to worry about as this will be easily overridden next week.

Governor vetoes Tenn. guns-in-bars bill | tennessean.com | The Tennessean

As this thread is very old and has over 1000 post, I have created a new thread to discuss the veto and the upcoming steps to override. http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/tennessee-politics-legislation/40161-restaurant-carry-vetoed.html

Not happy one bit....think the way it was done was pretty low down, but overall I am satisfied this is simply a delay (there's that word again ) and it will be law soon. Back to my expecting fathers analogy.....false labor guys....come back a bit later.

So not exactly sure what you are looking for then. There is never a 100% clear cut answer to these things, especially based on a general scenario...and dang sure not from the a bunch of guys/gals on the internet. As Dave tried to explain...it really doesn't matter how someone gained entry as far as being justified in using deadly force. To use deadly force you must have a reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily harm. The only time forcible and illegal entry come into that is that the law presumes you to have had that fear if that situation. So instead of yo having to prove you were...they would have to prove you weren't and/or that it wasn't reasonable for you to have that fear. So now...reasonable...that doesn't mean you have to know 100% the facts of the situation...the standard is supposed to be what would a reasonable person do if presented with the same facts you had and as you knew them to be at that moment...not what may have come to lite later. If you ever feel your life is threatened.....fire If you don't feel that way...don't. If you are going to try and hold court in your mind before shooting or don't think you can take a life if need be....get rid of your firearms.

I have to agree, if he already signed the veto and simply instructed someone to wait till today to file it, knowing there would still be time to override it, well....that is just about as petty as it gets.

My brother the LEO has told me that "force" can mean simply turning a door knob or opening the door. It doesn't have to mean kicking down or breaking anything.

Don't guess she chose to elaborate on what he did or is going to do by chance.

I know this is for National Bills, but just think of Nashville instead of Washington D.C. YouTube - Schoolhouse Rock- How a Bill Becomes a Law

Definetly....it would seem worst case scenario is that it is a few more days before it becomes law.

LOL...we're worse than a bunch of expecting father's pacing around in the labor and delivery waiting room....

That sounds very possible as well.

That makes a bit mor sense...other than the 20th thing again.

Hmmm...wish there was more info on this. First it's not 10 business days...it's 10 calendar days (excluding Sundays) so Saturdays count. How can the Governor's assistant veto a bill? Although I'm sure this was researched...and probably explains why he didn't veto it before leaving for China. If it is vetoed today...seems in the end all it really does is delay (for Hex ) the day it will become law, because the legislature is still in session and will override the veto.

This is what passed... If you are armed and.... ...are consuming in a place that serves alcohol - Class A misdemeanor ...are under the influence in a place that serve alcohol - Class A misdemeanor & HCP suspended for 3 years.

Don't see anything in The Tennessean about it...

It's not 100% that way now....... and absent any evidence to the contrary I'm not sure why I should be deemed any less or any more trustworthy than any other individual regardless of what they may be wearing...

Hmmm...however, it may not be 12:01 am that it would be in effect. TCA 3-2-104 says after the 10 days is up the Speakers of the House and Senate have to sign it (again). Of course there is no reason to think they wouldn't do that ASAP.

The NRA e-mail is what I was going by as well.

I "think" he has to veto it today, otherwise it becomes law tomorrow (12:01am)

WHAT?!?!?! I would like to hear more about those cases! I had my handgun stolen 8-9 years ago. The boys (two juveniles) were caught, plead guilty and ordered to pay restitution. I have yet to see a dime and in my hear know I never will. One moved out of the jurisdiction of the court and they didn't get any information from him about where he was going. I have contacted the juvenile court clerk and the thughs PO several times and either got the run around, left messages with no return or basically told tough titty on the few times I did speak to someone. So if there is a way to make the court system pay me and they go after the thugs...I'd be all for it. On being notified by the courts on changes to your case...unfortunately you are right. Title 40, Chapter 38 of the TCA has a whole list of victim's rights. Of which 40-38-111 is to be notified of changes...but they are just rights and not requirements. In fact 40-38-108 even provides immunity to the state and all, for failure to comply....so just another feel good thing.

Yep... This also show what "...shall not be infringed" is apparently worth in many areas.

I think you're right....but there has been a much different attitude about it up there. I believe the AG up there issued an opinion about OC and one Chief of Police said he didn't care his officers would still stop and "take down" anyone with a firearm.