Fallguy

That is correct... Guess we were mainly talking about carry on your person...

Most of the time they probably won't/don't. I'm just pointing out in one you are not violating the law (exemption) in one you still are (defense) But it's sort of like when someone breaks into your home...there is the presumption you are in fear of imminent death or serious bodily harm, but if the prosecutor feels he can prove it was reasonable for you to be in that fear, he can still charge and you can still be convicted.

Nothing says someone can't name you as a party to lawsuit even if you didn't act. They probably wouldn't have much of a case, but they could still name you. I guess my point is, while civil liability is something to think about it....I'm not ready for it to make me just stand by and do nothing in every situation if I feel I can do something to make the outcome better.

You're right....I should have noted I stoped the video just as they were going outside....and didn't see that part. I should have said as long as they were inside..... My bad...

Not that I've seen a fight in a long time...but my "basic" rule is as long as a person is still up and able to defend themselves then normally I wouldn't interfere (there are always exceptions to every rule). Now if one person goes down, gets knocked out, gives up or can't defend themselves any more...then IMO the fight is over and the winner needs to move on. It seems in the video there is several times the one gal appeared to "give up" and didn't want to fight...so "I think" I would have tried to stop it, probably by placing myself between her and the others. Nothing in the video I saw warranted the threat or use of deadly force.

Yeah and No.... It seems in practice most of the time they are they same, but from my understanding (IANAL) if there is an exmption...then as long as you fall into that exmption..it is "legal", if there is a defense...it is still illegal, but it provides a defense you could use in court.

Maybe she is from or thinking of another state...in some states they issue "weapons" permits that let you carry other weapons besides a handgun. But you're right, in TN our permits are for handguns only.

When I took the course just a few months after the law passed, I really don't remember much of anything about the law being discussed. The primary point of the class was a safety class. It seems like some in the legislature were worried about that now some may carry a handgun in public that had never touched one otherwise and thought they should be required to be at least familiar with the basic operation and safe handling of a firearm. Over the years some instructors have incorporated aspects of the law into the class and now the affects of alcohol and 39-17-1321 are required to be taught, but not sure that was ever the intent when the law was first wrote and the exemptions in subsection (e) were put in place. Like many aspects of TN firearms law, things/circumstances have changed, but not the law......

I think I'd had to go in and just walk around or ride the elevator up and down if I went there.....lol

Hmmmm I either didn't catch that or took it different. Like he left the guy and went on in.....

Good deal!!

Make sure and let us know what happens...

Federal money doesn't make it a federal park. Also while it is illegal to carry in federal buildings it doesn't mean all federal property is off-limits. As pointed out, federal parks are legal to carry in.

Do you remember the name of who you spoke to? If so when you go back and if the guard stops you again, ask to speak to her. Otherwise he may not care what she said and if you talk with anyone else they may or may not back up what she said.

I'm not sure about this school, but in all the other places I know...in TN a "School Resource Officer" is a certified LEO for whatever Police orSheriff's Dept the scholl is located in.

Wait....are you saying your common sense (based on logic, fact etc...) says those who OC should change what they do because of the common sense (based on emotion, fear etc...) of the anti-s?

Just because it did cause a problem doesn't mean it is up to him to change. Also kirkosaurus makes a good point, even though he changed the words...what some see as "common sense" about not OCing here or there or at certain times, many anti-s make the same "common sense" argument about carry period.

Well I don't argue that the majority public perception will be to blame the tool when it comes to firearms. But that doesn't mean gun owners have to agree with it or add to it. Guess it just struck me wrong.....not sure how to ever get idiots out there to stop blaming the tool and to start blaming the person using it.

The familes have my sympathies as well... But who exactly are "us"? This guy does not represent gun owners or those who carry any more than a drunk driver represents everyone that has a car. Stupid/Crazy people do stupid/crazy stuff, the tools they do it with doesn't mean everyone that has those tools are the same.

Everybody is free to do as they want, but I don't think I'd ever disarm just because I was about to talk with a LEO.

Well I don't think they would issue one just to suspend or revoke it. Also after thinking about it, you may not could get a HCP the day after a HCP convicition because of the whatever the sentence and certain conditions that apply.

This is not the actual form, but it has all the requirments... Handgun Carry Permit Qualifications and Requirements

Ah ok... Well I didn't see anything in the settings. Not sure if it is setting David can change to allow users to turn off notifications or not.

Hmmmm. I get a pop-up notification for PMs, but not likes. For "Likes" it only shows up in the "Notifications" link in the top bar. Maybe TGO David can elborate more soon....

I guess in the end it would be up to the DoS what constitued someone as being a "patient" in rehab "program". A question one may ask themselves is though.....how is the DoS going to know....again not suggesting any course of action.