Sky King

Thanks for putting this up.  This should be required viewing for all state level legislators as well as those in Washington. 

I don't know if he is really dumb or from another planet.  If you watch the videos of the Senate hearings last spring, you will understand what I am talking about.  His questioning of the representative from the Attorney General's office who was there because CAMPFIELD ask the AG to answer a specific question, will show that.  His questioning of others there to address the committee was so out of left field, I began to wonder just whose side he was on.    The AG reps answered his question but Campfield just kept on and on.     Also, we all knew that Haslam, Harwell and Ramsey were concerned about a bill that was what they considered too broad.  His amendment to include hunters with a valid hunting license was a definate poison pill.  While it was not ultimately what killed the bills but it certainly did NOT help.

For the OP, how did you contact Campfield?  Did you email him at his legislative email address or do you have a more sure way to contact him?

That would be nice if we all could be self employed but obviously we can't. But even for some of those who are. There are MANY "VENDORS" to FedEx who are self employed. The weapons policy applies to vendors as well. Once you drive on the property, your vehicle is subject to search and you can not have any of the banned items in the vehicle. If you do, you will not be allowed on the property.

"As described by the senator, his bill — unlike the NRA proposal — would further provide that a business could still ban weapons from its premises. Businesses, however, could not ban workers from gun ownership as a condition of employment and they would be prohibited from making searches of cars solely for the purpose of checking for guns. If an employee was otherwise found violating company policy against having a gun in a car, Campfield said the employee could be fired but could not be criminally prosecuted and would be eligible to receive unemployment benefits." The above is a quote from the article. These provisions are unbelievably dangerous. If they want to search your car, all they have to do is say it is for some other reason, just not the PROHIBITED reason, a firearm. It doesn't matter WHY they search your car, if the above provision is is place, if they DO find a firearm THEN they can fire you. When you examine your employers policies and look for items that are prohibited on the property, it may surprise you. I know that FedEx bans alcohol, drugs (obviously), pornographic materials, knives of ANY length, starters pistols, disabling sprays, clubs, ammunition, flare guns and the list goes on. All they have to say is that they have reason to believe you have ANY of the listed items (except guns, if a bill such as this passes) OR they claim that you have stolen company property or something from a customers shipment and that's it. Even if they don't find ANYTHING they may have claimed to have suspected to have been in the car, once they come across the LEGAL firearm, YOU ARE TOAST. If you refuse the search, you are STILL toast because you violated one of your conditions of employment.

Many companies already make consent to search your vehicle a condition of employement.  FedEx is that way.  However, as explained to me by member of FedEx security, they STILL will ask your permission AND you can refuse.  BUT you WILL be terminated if you refuse.  NOT for having anything prohibited by policy in your car because obviously they can not know if anything is IN your car without searching, you will be terminated for violating the conditions of employment which YOU agreed to when you accepted the job.   Needless to say, any attempt to sue them for loosing your job will be a major uphill fight.  One, they will show that YOU agreed to the terms of employment with your signature on a paper with a LOT of fine print.  Next, Tennessee is an employment at will state and they don't have to have a reason to fire you.    It is for all of these reasons we need the law to PROHIBIT an employer from banning the possession of the LEGAL firearm being in your PRIVATE vehicle while parked on the employers lot.  FORGET THE SEARCH ISSUE.  We won't win that and besides, while in principal, I don't LIKE the idea of them searching MY car but in the final analysis, SO WHAT IF THEY DO search my car.  If they can not ban my weapon, I don't care if they find it.  NOR are they going to find anything else that will give them grounds to terminate me. 

The General Assembly will be conveining in a few days.  There has been press coverage of Ron Ramsey saying that he expects a parking lot bill to pass early on.  It was also rumored several months ago that he was going to release to a few people a draft of a proposed bill.  To my knowlege that never materialized.  I am concerned that a bill that will pass quickly will have exemptions such as secured, fenced lots to appease the big business lobby such as FedEx, Volkswagen and others.  Such an exemption would be unacceptable for me.    I fear that they will propose this legislation with these expemptions and then if we oppose it, they will say they tried but we were uncooperative.   If anybody has seen or heard of what is going to be proposed, I would be interested in seeing it as I have been working on this for many years.

Yes, that would have been a good example to list.  But in reality, there are many.  In fact, I believe it is John Lott's information that states that firearms are used almost 2.5 million times a year to deter a crime where a shot is NEVER fired but again, we never hear of this in the liberal press.  It doesn't further their anti-gun agenda and "if it doesn't bleed, it doesn't lead". 

Thank you for your remarks.  I agree with your assesment of the last paragraph.  A saying I am fond of describes the oxymoron that exists when the government tries to solve a problem, "I am from the government and I am here to help".    The reality of our situation as the law abiding gun owners of this country is that our government is likely going to do SOMETHING.  No matter what they do, it will not be in keeping with The Second Amendment.  I have no doubt that if Obama doesn't get all the "control" he wants, he will just issue another executive order to achieve his goal.  As much as this will rub a lot of the readers of this forum the wrong way, it rubs me wrong too but if the major pro-gun lobby groups are not represented on this panel we can be sure of REAL problems.  Their presence in these discussion is needed to maintain if nothing else, damage control not to help them achieve their goals.   In all fairness, I also believe, as I state in the last paragraph, this panel in reality is only being formed to produce "solutions" that we all know they will arrive at.  It is a foregone conclusion and will only serve to provide Obama with the justification he wants to push the gun control legislation he wants. Obama wants the appearance of studying the issue when in fact, his mind is already made up.   I am not saying all this to sound as though I am giving up or throwing in the towel.  Those who know me know that I would never do either.  But reality is reality.  The best we can hope for is that this all blows over and the public's memory is short as it often is.  But be assured, Feinstein, Shumer and Obama are going to do their best to keep this pot stirred.

I sent this letter to Representative Stephen Fincher, Seators Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander.  I know addressing Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander is probably wasted breath, time and postage as I have never viewed them as friends of The Second Amendment, but I have to let them know my feelings.   If anybody here wishes to use any of this letter to their representatives in Washington, feel free to do so.  I just ask that you edit it as necessary to make it from you.   Representative ,   I write today to address an issue that is of great importance in light of the recent tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown Connecticut.   This horrific tragedy has caused a great deal of knee jerk responses which history has proven to have no effect on addressing the real causes of these actions.   President Obama, Senator Feinstein and others have responded as expected and have proposed actions and legislation to re-impose bans on assault type weapons and large capacity magazines.  Such a ban had ten years to show whether or not it could be effective.  It was shown to have NO impact on crimes of this type.  The massacre at Columbine occurred during this ban.   Two events in China, where private ownership of ANY firearm is illegal also show that taking away firearms will not stop such tragedies.  In one event, over 20 school children were savagely attacked and injured by a knife wielding assailant.  In another, a person armed with axes killed several people.  Both of these events occurred this fall.    President Obama’s offhand dismissal of the suggestion by the NRA for armed personnel in schools is typical of his long history of trying to undermine our rights protected by The Second Amendment.  This dismissal also ignores facts based on historical events, two VERY recently.   We rarely hear of these events in the liberal media because they do not help further an anti-gun agenda.  It should also be noted that President Obama’s children are protected at their school by Secret Service.       A shooting at the Clackamas Town Center mall in Oregon was stopped when the attacker was confronted by an armed law abiding citizen with a concealed carry permit.  While two people were killed, the potential rampage ended when the “bad person with a gun” was confronted by a “good person with a gun”.   In San Antonio Texas, an event that could have mirrored the Aurora Colorado theater shooting, was stopped with no fatalities when the attacker was shot by an off-duty sheriff’s deputy. The causes of these tragedies such as Sandy Hook certainly need addressing.  However when we choose to REVISIT FAILED strategies and overlook other KNOWN factors, all we are doing is producing a lot of smoke and mirrors in order to make it APPEAR that we are taking action.  Action that will do nothing to effectively reduce the potential of another event like Sandy Hook.    The ONLY impact it will have is to impose further sanctions on the law abiding citizens who are NOT the people responsible for these atrocities.   To not address the entertainment and video game influences is turning a blind eye to REAL influences on young people who are impressionable.  These factors desensitize young people to the realities of death and killing.  In real life, when you die or get shot, you can not just hit a “reset” button and start over and everybody is alive again.   These influences are especially important when the person watching these movies or playing these games has mental issues or a person who feels a need to extract revenge due to his social environment.   President Obama has appointed Vice-President Biden to head a group to propose further restrictions on our Second Amendment rights.  That is the wrong task for this group.  They should be tasked with looking at the REAL root causes for these events and THEN formulating real-world suggestion on how to address them.  If this group DOES NOT consider the suggestions of the NRA, then it will only prove that this is just “window dressing” and will be used to justify President Obama’s actions to further his anti-Second Amendment agenda.     Thank you

I agree with the majority of the responses.  The public is not ready to hear the rational answers.  It was all I could do to keep from throwing things and beating my fists on the table this Sunday morninig when Bill Moyers on the CBS Sunday morning news program repeatedly asked "why" the mother of the man who committed this horrific act owned "so many guns".  All I could do was yell at the TV, "because she could".    What we as gun owners need to do, as already posted, is be ready with the real answers around the water cooler at work.  Don't be fanatic.  Try not to come off like what they already see us as "gun nuts".    The real answers are simple: The "other" common denominator in all the mass shootings in the last year is the person had a mental problem.  You can't stop crazy. You stop a bad person with a gun with a good person with a gun.  When something goes really bad, who do you call?  The POLICE (a good person), who has a GUN. The principal at the school in Conneticut bravely tried to charge this individual only to be shot down.  If she had a firearm and trained in it's use, (as we do now with pilots in cockpits), she could have ended this masacre without sacraficing her life.  But as it was, she only had the ability to literally throw herself at the assailant.  Laws do not stop people from BREAKING laws.  We have speed limits but people still speed.  It is against the law to steal, murder and drink and drive but people still steal, murder and drink and drive.  Yet we don't take everybody's cars because some people choose to drink and drive.  In other words, we don't punish the majority good people for the actions of the minority law breakers. Murder is in the hearts of man.  Cain killed Abel and I don't think he used a gun.  Outlawing guns will not work.  Heroin, cocain, methamphetamine are all illegal but it still permeates our society.  We tried to outlaw alcohol with prohibition and we all know how that worked.  It didn't. Look at the countries that have outlawed firearms.  It has not had the effects that were intended. Look at the following links.  They will show that if you totally outlaw firearms, people will find another way, again, you can't stop "crazy".  China which strictly outlaws the private ownership of firearms is proof if this.   Villager slashes 22 kids with knife at elementary school gates in China   Ax-wielding man kills 3 kids, wounds 13 in China September 21, 2012   Needless to say, you will not see or hear this in the main stream media.   People ask why we need semi-automaitc firearms with large capacity magazines.  Well why would somebody need an automobile that is capable of 200 MPH + when there is no place in the United States where you can legally drive that fast on public highways.   Yet, if you have the cash, you can buy a Bugatti Veyron that will do 258 MPH right off the assembly line.  Several US production cars, such as Corvettes and others are fully capable of speeds in excess of 150 MPH and we all have heard the statistics of the number of fatal crashes where speed was a major contributing factor if not the only factor.  Yet there is no law prohibiting the manufacture and sale of these vehicles. 

Many thanks to all for the good input. I knew this group would have real information based on experience. Nothing beats experience.

I have tried to find online reviews but most of what comes does not really answer my question. I hope I am not covering old ground on this forum but I haven't found it. What I am looking for is a reccomendation for a good, reliable .40 SW ammo for practice, plinking or taking additional classes. I don't want to use the ammo I normally carry as it is quite high dollar, (Hornady Critical Defence JHP). I am signing up for another advanced class at my local range. I am required to supply 500 rounds of ammo and they reccomend new, not reloads. For such a class, I don't need hollow points. I want something reliable and economical if that combination is possible. There is a gun show here in Memphis the weekend before the class and will shop there also. But If anybody can reccomend a brand and why, I would like to hear your opinions. In years past, I tried an inexpensive ammo for plinking but I didn't really like it. Blazer, I think, while new, uses aluminum cases which expands excessively and caused extraction issues along with the fact that powder was very dirty and made a REAL mess in my gun. If it matters, I am shooting a Sig Sauer P250

I don't want anybody to misunderstand what I am going to say. I think the NRA and TFA along with the unhappy gun owners in her district played a VERY large part in defeating Maggart. But we also have to give credit to another issue that was very instrumental as well. When I went up there to knock on doors, we encountered a lot of teachers who were VERY unhappy with Maggart. Remember Maggart pushed legislation to take away the collective bargaining rights of Tennessee teachers. It is good that the General Assembly is focusing on the efforts of gun owners, the TFA and NRA in bringing down Maggart because we want them to know that the same thing can happen to them. As for Harwell's making light of the influence of the TFA and NRA, I think she is way more concerned than she makes out to be. She just does not want to give public credit and wants to downplay the strength we have gained with with victory. But as I have said in other circumstances (I play league pool a couple of nights a week), when your foot is on your opponents throat, don't let up.

I noted that the WSMV report stated that one goal is to repeal the permit. I have never heard that there was an intent to REPEAL the permit. Yes, a goal is to get a Vermont or Constitutional Carry bill passed but that would go along with the permit. It would just make it so that a permit is not REQUIRED for Tennessee residents. We would still want a permit so that we could still carry when we travel in other states that still require permits and honor the Tennessee permit.

I think it is interesting to note that Courtney Rogers had supporters from all over the state going to Hendersonville to help during her campaign. It shows the support she has. I was told this past weekend when I was there that Maggart had to HIRE people to do her door-to-door work. Out of all the people we talked to in their homes, I did not encounter one single person who was for Maggart. Only a few undecided who were very willing to hear more from Courtney and likely vote for Courtney after hearing more. Several teachers we spoke with were VERY critical of Maggart, one going so far as to say when we mentioned her name, "oooo I HATE that b@#ch". Not my words. I think Maggart's true colors came out during the last weeks of the campaign, telling lies about Courtney making false statements on her filing paperwork and "leaking" her private home phone number in emails to supporters resulting in calls to Courtney's home, one that was threatening in nature. That is not the kind of people we need in the General Assembly. By-the-way, Grunt67, I love your tag.

I truely believe that Safe Commute is not dead as a topic or possible bill for next session. With Maggart out now, we need to get behind Courtney Rogers in the general election THEN Judd Matheny as Speaker. My REAL concern is NOT that a parking lot bill will not be introduced, it is that it will NOT be in an acceptable form. All of those who aided in killing this legislation behind closed doors, Ramsey, Harwell, Maggart, McCormick, have ALL said that the bill needs more areas of compromise. THAT SCARES ME. They will work their @$$'s off to pass a bill next session just to say we were wrong about them. The problem I forsee is that it will have too many exemptions and be useless. Remember the much rumored "FedEx Amendment" that went around? The Safe Commute bill as introduced last January and amended was just fine as it was. As an earlier post noted, it was killed because the Republican leadership knew two things, it would have likely passed AND they DID NOT want a recorded vote. We REALLY need also to have either an accompanying non-discrimination bill as we did last year OR have the anti-discrimination provisions written into the parking lot bill. Since the last session ended, I have been contacted by several persons who work where I do, who recounted stories that would curl your hair that I will not go into detail here about. Discrimination and intimidation happens folks. If you don't believe it, you are nearsighted and blind. I know I have not been very active on the forums since the session ended but I have NOT stopped working on this. We CAN NOT rest untill this untill the Governors signature ink is dry. Just because the General Assembly is not in session does not mean the work takes a break. Let's stay the course.

It should also be noted that Vance Dennis has not been declaired the winner yet as his lead as of last night was only 5 votes. I spoke with a person who is very active in that district. He said that he was not comfortable with the lady who ran against Vance and was not sure if he would have wanted her to win but he is also happy with Vance. If Vance prevails, he should at LEAST be quaking in his boots and maybe just MAYBE he will understand the need to not stab his supporters in the back.

I couldn't agree more with the comments already posted. The Second Amendment issues in all fairness takes back seat to how she totally sabotaged the process. I don't know what the actual General Assembly rules say but if there is not something to address how the Calendar committee totally went outside their authority, there certainly should be. The work certainly is not over. Now we have to support Courtney Rogers in the general election. This should send a message to the other members of the Republican caucus that the gun owners in this state do not appreciate being stabbed in the back. With one leg of Beth Harwell's support knocked out, we now need to be sure our respective representatives KNOW that support for Beth Harwell for Speaker will not be acceptable. I know they use a secret ballot to choose the Speaker and we will never know who exactly votes for or against her, but if she makes it in again, then it will be time to take aim at another of her supporters in the next election. It is time to take no prisioners. I too wish I could have voted for Courtney but I did go to Hendersonville to walk through neighborhoods and knock on doors for her. That is the best I could do.

I agree. If I am not mistaken there will actually have to be two votes, the first one would be on a motion to suspend the rules. While this would not be on the actual bill itself, it could be an indication of the interest. If THAT vote passed, THEN there could be a vote on the bill itself. Going into an election cycle, this could go either way. I could see a lot of members not wanting a floor vote. They don't want a recorded vote. On the other hand, they may vote for it knowing it still can't go anywhere without the Senate just to get a good rating from the NRA. As Moped said, this awakend giant can not be allowed to go back to sleep or even rest. I met yesterday for a couple of hours with a journalist from an on-line media outlet in Memphis, The Mainstreet Journal. This guy said that while there are liberal reporters, they do have several conservative staff members who are supportive of gun rights. He claimed to be one of them. All of his questions and our conversation seemed to indicate that. In any case, he said that the article would take him about a week to work up and should be on-line to read after that. Like I said, we met for over two hours and I laid it out in detail about how the leadership did everything they could to derail this. I hope the article makes that clear.

It is a sad situation when, as we saw this spring, corporations with big money mean more to the elected than those who elected them. This permiates the General Assembly and the Governors Mansion. When you look at all the bills that 107th General Assembly passed, you see that they were definately a pro-business assembly. The AT&T bill passed last year is a good example and for me, the MOST telling was the legislation that VERY much loosened the restrictions on corporate donations to political campaigns. I understand that it takes a lot of money to run a successful campaign but in the end, it isn't AT&T, Volkswagen, Nissan, FedEx and others who step into the voting booth and pull the lever. We, as the voting public, need to look beyond the smoke and mirrors and ask ourselves, just who is really behind these people. If it is big business, you can bet that the interests of the individual person will be trampled. As I consider my votes in the future, you can be assured that one of the factors I will consider is just how much support they receive from the large corporate pacs. As far as next year is concerned, I for one do not think it too early to begin again. The only real problem as i see it, is because it is an election year, we don't know who the real players will be and what rolls will they play next January. We know that Mike Faulk and Eddie Bass have announced that the will not be back. Also I think we can be assured that Beth Harwell WILL be back but will she be the Speaker. Time will tell. What I would ask for those who would have liked to be more involved in this push is to consider NOW planning for next spring. I don't know everybody's work situation and mine has been such that it allowed me time to do what i did. What I did was "rat hole" some vacation time and personal time just for this purpose. We know that the General Assembly meets in the spring and many of the committee meetings are held on Tuesday's and Wednesdays' so I try to plan for that. If your work situation allows you the flexability to use vacation and other personal time on short notice, consider holding some back for next spring. I would also like to thank everybody who helped us this year. Richard Archie, Kenny Crenshaw, John Harris, Darren LaSorte just to name a few. I don't know a lot of real names, just forum names. But believe me, every phone call, every email was important. While I am disapointed in the ultimate outcome this year, if nothing else it helped us in a limited way, (short of having a real floor vote to see who they REALLY are) to know who our friends are. Given the degree of opposition from the leadership, the fact that we got this legislation further than we have in the past, is testimony to the strength of our effort. We have never had our bills on this issue make it completely out of committee, ready for the floor in BOTH the House and Senate. Thanks again and let's start working on next year now.

In many cases, I would have sympathy, but in this case, he brought it all on himself and as far as I am concerned, it couldn't happen to a better person.

Well, let's just say I have it from a very reliable source that Monday, the 23rd that "the Governor's people have been deployed throughout the legislature to give republican's their marching orders--to kill the bills at all costs". Actually there is indications that these pushes could have ties all the way to Lamar Alexander. Alexander is no friend of gun owners and he and Haslam are good buds. There are more skeletons in more closets that you can imagine and enough responsibibility for the death of these bills to more than go around. The legislative leadership, while they made the most noise and were the instruments that actually killed them and are equally to blame, the Governor's office CAN NOT sit back and act the innocent by-stander in this. What also needs to be considered is that Mike Faulk is not running for re-election. Faulk is an attorney. While he said that he did some soul searching and listened to the concerns of his fellow assembly members, a private practice attorney does not want to burn bridges with the state if you want any state business to come your way. He is simply making sure he has no enemies when he leaves the General Assembly. There are only a few in The General Assembly I feel have been honest throughout this whole ordeal. Eddie Bass is one and I for one will be sorry to see him leave as he too is not running for re-election. Eddie has always supported gun rights for as long as I have been involved in these issues. And the times I have spoken with him personally, he is just a good, down-to-earth, common sence regular guy. I believe him to be smart and honest and unfortunately it just seems that politics has no place for an honest person these days.

That is exactly what I was saying. He absolutely did NOT support the bills but he didn't want to have to face the gun owners if he vetoed the bills and he didn't want to have to face his corporate money donors if he signed them. So he sent instructions to the Republican cacuses in both chambers to do HIS dirty work and kill the bills so they would never reach his desk. He is like Pilate when he washed his hands in a symbolic display to say he had nothing to do with the crucifixion of Jesus. Pilate played a big part in that and Haslam is just as culpable in the demise of this legislation as Ramsey, Harwell and Maggart.

IMHO, a load of crap. Why should HE wait. To hear the people in the House, THEY are waiting on the SENATE. They aren't waiting for each other, they are waiting for time to run out. As for the BS about "patiently awaited any suggested changes", the suggestion to drop the Campfield amendment has been on the table almost since it was put on the bill. It was my opinion when it was added that it would be the poision pill. Everybody, (the leadership and Governor) always stated that they wanted the bill to be narrowed in scope. Well the hunter amendment made it too broad. What they aren't saying and REALLY want is the amendment that excludes fenced lots. They didn't get it and have done everything they could to kill it. Also Haslam didn't want this bill, even with it limited to permit holders, unless it included a fenced lot exclusion. He pressured the General Assembly Republican leadership and cacuses HARD to kill the bills. He didn't want to have to deal with it. He needed to be able to go to his corporate donors and tell them he had killed the bill. He wants to be able to go to the gun owners and tell them that it wasn't HIS fault, the bill never made it to his desk.