Fallguy

Welcome

Hello....and why are the 3 of us up so late?...lol

The funny thing is I bet he already carrys everywhere and anywhere now without a permit.

39-17-1359 is worded to allow the property owner to word the signs as to ban weapons on all or part of his property and the signs only have to be posted to the entrance to the part that he intends to ban weapons. He can ban them from the whole property by placing the signs at the entrance to the property as you turn of the public road. Or just the building by placing the signs at the entrances to the building. Or just a floor of the building or even just a room if the signs are placed at those entrances. Of course I have no way of knowing, but maybe it was the Nashville Airport Authority's intention to allow people that may be coming to pick people up and help them to get their baggage to remain armed. Or....it could just be an oversight on their part as to not posting signs in that area and/or at the top of the stairs. If anyone knows someone that works for the Airport Authority or the Airport Police it may be worth asking them. (LOL...in another thread I just said it's not a good idea to ask a LEO about the law. )

The bookmark I had for LexisNexis has been having problems. Try this one... http://www.michie.com/tennessee/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp= That's correct. That is the part covered under 39-17-1309©(1) It doesn't matter if it is the game, practice, graduation or whatever as long as you are a non-student adult and you do not handle it, it can be left in your car. When I have had to go inside the school, I simply take my weapon of my person and store in the car somewhere in the passenger area. Some have suggested to be safe that you may want to remove your weapon before getting to the school so as not to be handling it on school grounds. As far as what is school grounds, I would say any property owned by the school (Dept of Ed.) but not the public street. The law doesn't say school "zone" just property including any building, athletic fields etc... Just use common sense and don't handle your weapon while on the property and for sure don't enter any buildings with it on your person and you should be fine. Oh.....and 99% of the time LEO's are not the best source for the law. Of course that's not say an internet forum is the best place either...

I still hope to hear from my Rep and/or the AG on this, but after thinking on it some more. I wonder if we have all (or me anyway) have been reading it wrong. I talked in another thread how commas(,), semi-colons(, colons( the words (and), (or), (if) all can make a big difference in the way a law reads and what means. On those parts of the self-defense law that mention 39-17-1322 they have a a comma(,) after "Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322" That comma may mean that 39-17-1322 is not affected by the rest of the paragraph or that the rest of it doesn't affect 39-17-1322, however you want to look at it. Razorback I agree that in 99% of the cases a DA is not liable to prosecute anyone if they had or used a gun in self-defense that they otherwise should not have had or had it where they shouldn't have. But I would just like clarification on it. Because if they can it would be something to keep in mind. Also....I admit I didn't know that loaded long guns transported in your vehicle were legal in the states surrounding TN till you mentioned that in another post. That is another thing on my "wish list" for TN.

For about the last 10-15 years pictures taken at the DMV are digital and stored. Not only can they use one already stored for you DL or HCP. But if the agency (Police, Sheriff etc...) has the appropriate computer system, that picture shows up when they check your DL or HCP information.

Well for the most part it dead, in the sense that it will have to start from scratch next year, in both the house and the senate. A bill can carry over the summer within the same two year session of the legislature, but this is the last year in this session (2007-2008). Any bill that didn't pass this session will have to be reintroduced new in the next session (2009-2010). But if they can get it all worked out like they want, it could pass straight trough and be law July 1, 2009.

Oh well.... not really surprised though.

Yep....long lunch I guess. From the meetings I watched so far, being punctual is not a big thing in Nashville.

Someday I hope....... In the meantime I've heard a rumor that this guys family is about to move...if so, big party at my place...

Thanks

I know I should know....but when is the next game and on what station?

FWIW, some did think it was a step backwards. Before the "new" self-defense law passed, you already did not have to retreat in TN and were presumed to be in fear of your life or serious bodily harm when you were within your residence. I understand not wanting to allow the guy at the crackhouse to claim self-defense when he shoots and kills someone over a deal gone bad, but as it is worded it appears to broad. Depending on the answer we get......this is toward the top of my "wish list" to address when we get a new Speaker and/or a more gun friendly legislature.

I'm just glad I haven't missed it....I though orginally they weren't suppoed to meet till 12:00. I was going to the link to watch and saw 10:30 . But then also saw the link for 12:30. ...and then found this thread that caught me up.

As some may have noticed, how T.C.A. 39-17-1322 applies to self-defense has come up in a couple of recent topics as well as in the past and also on other boards I'm on. So I have just sent an e-mail to my State Rep, that has helped me with legal questions when it comes to the T.C.A. in the past. Here is what I sent. So we'll see what this may find out for us. Just for background for those that may not have followed this 39-17-1322 says... Where it says "this part" it means Part 13 or Chapter 17 of Title 39 of the T.C.A. Which basically means any law that starts 39-17-13xx. So even though it may otherwise be illegal to possess, display or use a handgun in certain circumstances under Part 13, it would not be illegal if you possessed, displayed or used the handgun for self-defense or defense of another. However the new self-defense law would seem to remove this protection. 39-11-611 Self Defense As you see sub-parts ((1), ((2) and (d)(3) all say "Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322"

Have to admit....I chuckled a little. Glad it was only a lost pooch. It does seem despite our best efforts we all relax just a bit at times.

Welcome

There is 39-17-1322 which says... However.....the new self-defense/castle doctrine law would seem to practially do away with that statute. See 39-11-611 sub-parts ((1),((2) and (d)(3) all start by saying "Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322"

Welcome

Welcome

LOL...true....just server space I guess. ...and the fact I don't see it ever coming to an end. Oh.....and like a train wreck, I can't keep from watching...

I vote for closing this thread......

Yep... ...but if I understand things now, AT&T has hired her this years and it seems the Speaker's opinion has changed.....wonder what made him reconsider?