Fallguy

Well as far as the LEO carry, nothing really new here I don't think. The opinon in that since is just saying that the fact the LEO is also a school board member doesn't make any difference. Also state laws not applying to certain "population bands" are not uncommon, but guess I hadn't thought about that 39-17-1350(e) kept 39-17-1350 from applying to Rutherford and Bedford counties. Guess those counties just have a bit of pull. Wonder how many LEOs statewide know that?

While McWherter was more anti than Haslam that last bit of commercials was more a political tactic than pro or anti 2A. I really don't think firearms were much of an issue before or after those commercials for the majority of voters. But...I don't think the Governor will be the issue the next couple of years...it sounds like he is ready to rubber-stamp anything the legislature sends him. On a state level I have to agree that D or R isn't an automatic sign or supporting or not firearms legislation. Although the last session was better for us than previous ones, many think firearms issues have been a large focus for several years.... I just hope they don't think this is the time to take things off and just keep the status quo.

All good points...

That would help those with a HCP and I would like to see it passed as well. However would also like to see posession in a private vehicle allowed without a HCP.

I really don't think any bill would say something to the effect that the inside of your car is like your home. I think more than likely what would happen (if anything) is simply an exception added to 39-17-1308 for a private vehicle. However I don't think that alone would address the vehicle being on another's private property, so would still need a parking lot exception bill.

I've heard that several times, but never from a property owner. +1

One place to start may be the TN House Rebublican Caucus Tennessee House Republican Caucus | Facebook House Caucuses & News - TN General Assembly

My question though is, since the House elects a Speaker from among themselves, how do we have any influence over who they nominate and/or elect?

Not sure what, if any, influence us citizens have over who becomes speaker, but one person I think would be a good one is Steve McDaniel of the 72nd district. He has been Deputy Speaker and is an over all great guy. He has always voted to help us.

What matters to me even more than that is Common Sense or Nonsense...

Well as with a lot of the firearms laws in TN there is nothing exact in the law...what is "plainly visible" is up to the discretion/interpretation of the owner, HCP holder, LEO and/or Judge. Out of those 4 there is one that counts more than others, but I'd hope to never get to that point.... But the simple answer to your question is, NO, there is no legislative or judicial definition of "plainly visible" or what minimum size (if any) would constitute that...at least not to my knowledge.

If a felon is in possession of a Handgun, he is violating the law regardless of if there are HCPs or not. The times I've heard of a felon being charged with possession of a handgun...it has always been just that, Felon in Possession of a Handgun, 39-17-1307((1) or 39-17-1307©(1) not simple possession in 39-17-1307(a)(1) So the fact the felon didn't have a HCP didn't result in additional charges. When a LEO sees someone in possession of a handgun, do having HCPs make it easier for them to detain the person and check things...perhaps. But how much freedom are you willing to give up for security? Personally...I think the scale has been tipped in the wrong direction for quite a while.......

IPBoard looks good and easy to use and navigate on my iPhone even without TapTalk

True...I think maybe he just meant about that sign in the sense it sort of seems to play to both sides.

Congratulations on 5 years of soberity.... However I don't think that everyone that has a drink is immature. But I also don't feel then need to rain on other's parades either.....

While not as drastic as yours...I'm sort of regretting a recent move myself...so I feel for you and hope something can work out for you!

.....and if you're not sure where to check the laws, Handgunlaw.us is a good source.

I agree with 1gewehr and HvyMtl

Well while location and wording are both important....to me wording is a bit more important. Mainly because if a sign is in the foyer or on the wall close to a door, it still might be considered at the "entrance" however if the wording isn't correct, it really doesn't matter where it is located.

Looks like a black square

If a place is improperly posted there are no penalties/liabilities for the property owner other than they haven't legally prevented those with a HCP from carry on their property. The trouble (as you sort of mention) is that it could take a judge to make the determination and it may or may not go your way. But has been said many times on here, there are no known cases of a violation of 39-17-1359 going to court also these types of posting are what many people reference when they say "concealed means concealed."

Well one reason background checks for HCP take longer is because they also send a copy of your application to the Sheriff of the county you live in to see if they know of any reason you should be denied. The Sheriff has 30 days to respond.

Actually couldn't be more wrong... Even though they allowed the "Circle and Slash" symbol to be a legal posting on it's own if used. They also went on to define what "substantially similar" must include if wording alone is used. 39-17-1359((3)(A) If a sign is used as the method of posting, it shall contain language substantially similar to the following: AS AUTHORIZED BY T.C.A. § 39-17-1359 , POSSESSION OF A WEAPON ON POSTED PROPERTY OR IN A POSTED BUILDING IS PROHIBITED AND IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE. ( As used in this section, “language substantially similar to” means the sign contains language plainly stating that: (i) The property is posted under authority of Tennessee law; (ii) Weapons or firearms are prohibited on the property, in the building, or on the portion of the property or building that is posted; and (iii) Possessing a weapon in an area that has been posted is a criminal offense.

Doesn't sound like it conforms to 39-17-1359 to me either. Does not contain required language, not posted on the "entrance".

One thing would be for those without a HCP to be able to keep a handgun in their car, just like in their house. Espically since you are supposed to be able to defend and unlawful intrustion into your occupied car the same as your residence.