Fallguy

I think it has jail time because if you carry past a 39-17-1359 sign (when they get it all worked out) in a place that serves alcohol you could go to jail.

I don't think a knife with a blade of 4" or less is a weapon. As far as banning weapons instead of just handguns, most people can't carry any type of weapon anyway except handguns by us and batons by those with certificates of training.

Attached below is the amendment. Sections 3-6 are basically the same as in the OP The changes were in Sections 1 and 2 Sec 1 is a definite improvement!! Sec 2 is what I'm sure they will address further on the increasing the penalty for. However it would seem that by adding a new subsection, "consuming" would only be illegal if you are within in the confines of a place open to the public that serves alcohol. The "under the influence" part would still apply elsewhere. I have to say I think this is a very good bill!!

There are many debates on here about school carry, you may want to search some of those threads. But basically this bill would have cleared things up a bit. The part of the law you posted in the other post is only a defense to the misdemeanor charge of having a weapon on school property. However there is also a felony violation of having a weapon on school property as set forth in subsection ( there is no defense for that. The main difference between ( and © is whether you had an "intent to go armed" If you have an "intent to go armed" then there is no defense for carry on school property. (Other than those laid out in 39-17-1310) Some say that if the gun is loaded, then you have an intent to go armed. This bill would have made a simple exception for those that have a HCP period.

Firearms Law Day in House Judiciary March 10, 2010, was scheduled as the day of the House Judiciary Committee to take up the firearms bills that would move forward for 2010. The one topic that has clearly garnered the most attention is the one which addresses what would the Legislature's response be to the Davidson County Chancellor who declared unconstitutional the change in the law in 2009. House Bill 3125 (Todd) / SB 3012 (Jackson) passed out of the House Judiciary by a vote of 4-2 after almost 30 minutes of debate in the scheduled one hour session. There were 43 other bills on notice and less than half of those were then taken up. It is important to understand that HB3125 was amended on Monday of this week with an amendment that totally rewrites the bill. The version of the bill appearing on the legislative website at present is not what passed. The version that passed has the effect of completely repealing the existing law on possession of firearms where alcohol or beer is served (TCA 39-17-1305). The result of this amendment would be not that it is legal to carry guns in such places. The result would be that the carrying of firearms in these places is now treated no differently than carrying in any other place - its illegal unless you have a carry permit. If you do have a carry permit, it is still illegal under the proposed amended bill if the property is correctly posted (TCA 39-17-1359) and/or if you are "consuming" alcohol or beer (TCA 39-17-1321). There were many comments made during the discussion about this issue. One of the most noteworthy was by Rep. Eddie Bass. Rep. Bass is from Giles and Marshall counties. He has a long history in law enforcement and was formerly the sheriff of Giles county. He spoke to the claims of Gov. Bredesen, Chief Ronal Serpas, Rep. Jimmy Naifeh and the Chiefs of Police Association which collectively claim that "all" law enforcement oppose this bill. As did Senator Doug Jackson in his veto over-ride speech in 2009, Rep. Bass spoke to the issue of law enforcement on this bill. He emphasized that the law enforcement officers that he knew, as well as himself, are substantially all in favor of this legislation because they know and respect the fact that Tennessee handgun permit holders are good, honorable and law abiding citizens. This is the type of reputation that Tennessee's firearms owners need and deserve but at the same time it is the type of reputation that we must jealously protect by being law abiding and helping to protect and preserve our rights, our cities, our counties and our state. At this point, the bill must still be voted on by the full House Judiciary as well as by the Senate Judiciary. We should have adequate votes in both but we need you to start contacting these committee members as well as your individual House and Senate members now. It is important to push this bill fast because we must anticipate another effort by those who would deny our rights to defeat this legislation by veto or otherwise. Several other firearms related bills moved forward and will be updated on the next general status report. Contact Information is on their individual pages: Senate Judiciary Committee Officers Mae Beavers, Chair Doug Jackson, Vice-Chair Doug Overbey, Secretary Members Diane Black Dewayne Bunch Mike Faulk Brian Kelsey Jim Kyle Beverly Marrero House Judiciary Committee Officers Kent Coleman, Chair Jon Lundberg, Vice-Chair Janis Sontany, Secretary Members Eddie Bass Karen Camper Jim Coley Vance Dennis Henry Fincher Judd Matheny Barrett Rich Mike Stewart Eric Watson

The only discussion I heard on court was the law that passed last year and her wanting to wait until the court case was resolved until the legislature did anything new. This bill, when passed, would make any ruling on the old law moot as this bill would make new law. There is nothing obviously vague in the new bill that could be challenged as the last one was.

LOL....I can just imagine who said that....

From watching the video it sounded like Rep Todd and the committee members may tweak the amendment a bit more before it presented to the full committee. After that the text of what is voted on by the full committee is added the webpage.

Thanks! I would just add that "taken off notice" doesn't directly mean that a bill is dead for the session, but considering the sub-committee is only scheduled to meet one more time, it probably has that affect on those 4 bills

Hmmm...text of the amendment still not on state's website. Wish there was some way to see it.

I've been away taking care of some of the stuff that kept me from going to Nashville. Anyone watched it yet that can give an update?

The penalty for violation of 39-17-1359 remains the same, a $500 fine. I don't think you'll see for a long time it not being a criminal penalty of some sort. The increased penalty and revocation I was talking about was attached to a violation of 39-17-1305 in the bill. Right now being armed and under the influence is a misdemeanor. It sounds like they want to make it a felony. Also as you may or may not know conviction of a Class A misdemeanor only suspends your HCP for the term of the sentence. It sounds as if they want to make it where it would be revoked...which of course if a violation becomes a felony it would automatically do.

Hmmmmm LOL

I can't even get http://state.tn.us to come up now. Anyone else? Part of me wants to tell some news agency how the states gun owners crashed the state's website, another part of me thinks the less attention brought to firearms bills in the media the better....

The hospitality guy mentioned it would allow carry in ALL places that serve alcohol, including those that only serve beer. Also the part about exacting wording for 39-17-1359 is still there and it was mentioned that ALL entrances would have to be posted, even if a place had "hundreds" like Opryland hotel. It does look like they want to make it automatic revocation of your HCP and/or increase the penalty (jail/fine) for consuming while armed in any of the places. But sounds like they will address that in the full committee

While Volphin's comments are a bit turse.... The fact that all LEOs don't want to be judged by the bad deeds of a few comes to mind in that not all HCP holders should be judged by the actions of a few or one.

Can't seem to get to any of the Legislature web pages.....

Guess we have crashed the system.... I've lost the video and can't seem to get it back....

No set time. It may be on the full committee's calendar next week, but doesn't have to be. I think the though if/when it passes the full committee, it will be ready to go to the floor, but the calendar committee will choose when that is. But then there is still the Senate version that has to move, although they will probably wait until it passes the house and just substitute the house bill for theirs.

I did, my bad

Passed as amended to full committee. Hopefully text of the amendment will be posted soon.

Well said Rep Bass!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sontany is one reason it is hard to watch the meetings.....

I see Rep Todd already in the room....

General Assembly Schedule then click on the little camera icon for Criminal Practice and Procedure