Fallguy

Fair enough.....but then how do you suggest to scare your neighbors?

Without looking it up not sure if MS is a must notify state or not, but I'm not sure just handing over your HCP without saying anything else would be considered actually notifying a LEO you are armed. As Parrothead said, he handed over his HCP and said he was armed. There are many threads on here where people have said they've used their HCP as ID. Also it being an out of state LEO it may have taken him a moment to notice it said Handgun Carry Permit and wasn't a second DL/ID or something. I've only been stopped twice while armed, notified once, didn't the other. Nothing abnormal went down either time. But the time I did notify I told him when he first approached the vehicle that I had a permit and I was armed and didn't do anything else till he instructed me to do so. Guess I'm just saying that IMO just handing over your HCP without saying the words "I'm armed" (or the like) could cause confusion or maybe even trouble.

But why do you think others get a HCP if they aren't going to carry?

Good answers Dave!!

39-17-1307 applies to non-HCP holders... 39-17-1305 does not exist anymore which is what those signs refereed to. There is no difference for "illegal carry" in a place that serves alcohol than there is any other place for a non-HCP holder. If the ABC is still requiring those signs, there is no law that backs them up. SB3012/Public Chapter 1009 removed 57-3-204 and 57-4-203 from the TCA. AGAIN that sign never prohibited carry...only warned of the consequences of violating 39-17-1305....and AGAIN there is no 39-17-1305 any more.

There are lots of things you can't carry on a plane that aren't "weapons". As far as courtrooms, there is nothing in 39-17-1306 about chemical spray, of course that doesn't stop a judge from prohibiting if he wants. Not really sure chemical spray is mentioned anywhere in the TCA at all actually.

Not sure "right" and "subject to" can really be used together.

I know I've said this before but.... First the "new law" also removed the requirment for the old ABC signs....so those are no longer required. However if a place has still left them up and those are the only ones they have, they never did and still don't prohibit carry.

Should.....did for me. Maybe David can shed some light in a little...

Hmmm....that must be new, didn't even know we had group pics till I looked. So you don't have a +Add Pictures button, right? I joined just to see and it showed for me. Upper Right about the pics.

Guess I'll be first with this answer... No, I haven't had any classes since the HCP class. It's not necessarly that I've avoided them or don't think they would be helpful, it just hasn't worked out for me to go for various reasons.

Hmmm.... I can see the button.

Remember just feeling threatened is not enough to use deadly force...at least not in TN. ....and just drawing the weapon is using deadly force...in TN at least. The danger has to be imminent. Without knowing more about how the three approached him, there is no way to know if he reasonably feared imminent death or serious bodily injury. However situations like this is why I wish TN had a law like AZ (I think) that allows and individual to say they have a weapon or even expose a concealed weapon if they are doing it to try and de-escalate a situation without being charged. However I don't think even the AZ law allows you to actually draw the weapon for that purpose.

Since this is a new topic it has been moved to new thread.... http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/handgun-carry-self-defense/47073-training-after-handgun-carry-permit-class.html

Yep.....that is an interesting thing I've found in some states. They are not "must inform" in the sense that you have tell the LEO right off the bat, but rather if you are asked for any form of ID (like your DL) then you must inform and present your carry permit at the same time.

I would think that means no knives as well then. Although mainly dealing with handguns and HCP holders, 39-17-1359 seems to allow a property owner to ban all "weapons" not just handguns. One reason the new law says the circle and slash symbol with the "item" that is to be prohibited.

My favorite comment... "Maybe some liberals signed up as they are not really all there." LOL

Well I really meant about the "not able to take a life" part (The reason I put in bold in my quote). I'm not sure why you'd even own a gun then, let alone get a permit. I somewhat understand the "Supporting the 2A" idea....but.....well....like was said probably better ways.

Agree, but that just furthers the OP's question.....why get a HCP if they feel that way and aren't going to carry?

LOL...yeah everyone on here posting that they carry most of the time (as was more or less said in the OP) does little to answer the actual question in the OP... So why do you think so many people get there permit and then never carry?

Actually several have posted on here that the state has mailed receipets back to them when they renewed by mail, but I'd still rather do it in person. The only time I was concerned was when I was getting ready to go out of state....wasn't sure if an out of state LEO would know that receipt meant it was still valid. Not sure what would show on a computer check when past the expiration date but renewal is outstanding either.

Restraing Orders aren't worth the paper the written on....as Mikepapa1 said, get an Order of Protection. Also as others said, report every incident so there is a record. I guess just making threats aren't against the law....unless they make you "reasonably fear imminent bodily injury" [see 39-13-101(a)(2)] but at that point I guess you'd be justified in using deadly force if you fear "serious" bodily injury [see 39-11-106(a)(34)]. So that is the whole key.... Can an unarmed person make your reasonably fear imminent bodily injury or death? Sure But it will depend on the situation at the time and a record of the thing that caused you to have that fear could/would be helpful.

Wasn't their talk of doing away with or at least completely reconstructing the ABC?

Well I would say the percentage that "never" carry is very, very low 1-2%. My guess that the rest of 70-80% who don't carry regularly got their permit so as to be legal when they do choose to carry. I know one guy who only take his when he goes out of town. My guess is because he feels "comfortable" around our hometown and only wants it with him when/if he may go somewhere where they could be a threat. Is that somewhat naive? Maybe, but that is his choice. I also think that it may be that many don't know the law as you point out. Their not sure where it is legal and not legal to carry. I've had my permit for about 13 years and for the first 4-5 I did not carry regularly. That was because that the time 39-17-1359 allowed a property owner to simply "announce" that they prohibited carry. What announce meant was never defined. So I thought it could be possible a place "announced" at an earlier date, me not know it, walk in and be illegal. Also didn't understand that even if I was carrying illegally that it didn't necessarily mean I'd be whisked off to jail, no questions asked or no request to leave first. Anyway....didn't mean to ramble. One thing I'm curious about to is the percentage of people that carry and/or keep one in their vehicle that don't have a permit.....know a few of those too.

I agree. Even though it was the manager that posted and corporate that reversed the decision, I would still be polite and thankful to the manager. Don't give him a reason to complain to corporate about HCP holders.