Jump to content
docachna

CMA Fest - downtown streets are prohibited carry ?

Recommended Posts

First of all, let me make clear I have no intention of getting anywhere near the downtown Nashville craziness that IS CMA Fest. However, WSMV-4 in Nashville just ran a story that portions of streets that are closed off for CMA Fest will feature Metro officers who are checking parties entering for weapons, with metal detecting wands.

I just have to wonder where in Tennessee Code or city ordinance gives them the authority to do that, unless the streets have been rented/leased to a private entity. If the streets were rented/leased, I could see the argument, but still a lot of questions to be answered.

Does anybody have knowledge about this that I may not ? I just hate to hear government officials brag endlessly on camera about what they're doing to "keep the public safe", by removing the public's right to keep and bear arms. I don't remember anybody asking me if I wanted to be kept safe this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a part about how LEO can use wands to get by that law, wait for OS to chime in. OS is good at finding the ins and outs of these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RED333 said:

There is a part about how LEO can use wands to get by that law, wait for OS to chime in. OS is good at finding the ins and outs of these things.

yep, from 39-17-1359:

.....

"(g) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (g)(2), nothing in this section shall authorize an entity of local government or a permittee thereof to enact or enforce a prohibition or restriction on the possession of a handgun by a handgun carry permit holder on property owned or administered by the entity unless the following are provided at each public entrance to the property:
(A)  Metal detection devices;
(B)  At least one (1) law enforcement or private security officer who has been adequately trained to conduct inspections of persons entering the property by use of metal detection devices; and
(C)  That each person who enters the property through the public entrance when the property is open to the public and any bag, package, and other container carried by the person is inspected by a law enforcement or private security officer described in subdivision (g)(1)(B) or an authorized representative with the authority to deny entry to the property.
.....
 
- OS
  • Like 1
  • Wow 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and we can thank our liberal mayors for the push for that language.  Chilhowee park gathering center, (not a park) was the spark for this nuance when Knoxville's mayor declared it a GFZ during the Fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that nice that local governments can set up 'gun free' areas on public streets and public sidewalks literally anywhere and turn people around with handgun carry permits?  I can understand verifying that someone has a permit but refusing entry? That is crazy on a public street or sidewalk.  This law was passed by a mostly NRA endorsed Republican super majority legislature and a Republican governor.  The same group did absolutely nothing for handgun carry permit improvements this year such as college campus carry.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so are they really manning each "entrance" to these sections of street with officers with wands?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s too bad businesses, events; grocery stores etc. have to choose sides. Because usually they side against us. But it’s the states fault. It is a crime to carry a gun in Tennessee; the state does not recognize carry as a right. Until that changes we will have zones where the law abiding citizen can’t carry and the criminals that want to kill them can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DaveTN said:

It’s too bad businesses, events; grocery stores etc. have to choose sides. Because usually they side against us. But it’s the states fault. It is a crime to carry a gun in Tennessee; the state does not recognize carry as a right. Until that changes we will have zones where the law abiding citizen can’t carry and the criminals that want to kill them can.

I dont understand all this...its a crime to go armed in Tennessee but it is a defense if you have a HCP...I mean, WTF?  Is that the best we can do in a Republican controlled legislature over a multi year period?  I think we can and should do better.  Do any states do it better?  Cant we model our law after theirs?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, JAlexanderMSgt said:

I dont understand all this...its a crime to go armed in Tennessee but it is a defense if you have a HCP...I mean, WTF?  Is that the best we can do in a Republican controlled legislature over a multi year period?  I think we can and should do better.  Do any states do it better?  Cant we model our law after theirs?  

Yes were do have a Republican Controlled Congress but we have a Rogue Governor that will veto almost any bill pertaining to guns that reaches his desk and I don't think we have enough power in Congress to over ride his veto. There are some Republicans that would side against a veto overthrow.I don't think it will get any better if Diane Black gets in! She is one of these people that talks the talk but won't walk the walk. .........JMHO

Edited by bersaguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best thing would be to remove the whole 'intent to go armed' crime in this state giving us constitutional carry.  Next best thing would be to change the whole intent to go armed crime to concealing a weapon in public is a crime.

Even if you change/remove the intent to go armed law, you still have to change/remove the no guns signs law, the weapons in parks law, and also the weapons on school property law.

Doesn't do you any good to have constitutional carry if it is still illegal to carry at the library because there is a 'no gun' sign law or at your local school or college because there is still the state's school weapons law on the books.

Mississippi probably approached this the most politically realistic way.  You can carry concealed or open there without a license.  If you want to carry at a college or K-12 school, courthouse, or certain other places, then you have to get an enhanced license.  The enhanced license is the same as our handgun carry permit.  No politician is going to vote for a law that legalizes people without permits to carry at colleges and K-12 schools.  Look at how little our politicians do for us here and we need permits just to carry.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JAlexanderMSgt said:

 Do any states do it better?  Cant we model our law after theirs?  

Georgia has very similar laws to Tennessee, with some major differences being that carrying without a license is an element of the crime (so LEOs can't just stop and demand a license), signs do not have the same force of law, and differences in campus carry, bar carry, and church carry (the latter being worse, in general).  We still have some major things to change, like courthouse, polling places, and removing the weasel room for government buildings, but they are a lot better than they were before 2007.  So in just over a decade, Georgia went from some really terrible carry laws to much better ones.  Some of the most important changes have been within the last 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JAlexanderMSgt said:

I dont understand all this...its a crime to go armed in Tennessee but it is a defense if you have a HCP...I mean, WTF?  Is that the best we can do in a Republican controlled legislature over a multi year period?  I think we can and should do better.  Do any states do it better?  Cant we model our law after theirs?  

I don't think we need to model ourselves after another state; Constitutional Carry is pretty straight forward.

I suspect at some point Constitutional Carry will be put to a vote in this state. It would be a battle to get it passed; if it required a business owner to allow carry it would fail. That’s just my opinion; I could be wrong.

But even if we get it that doesn’t mean you will be able carry past a sign on a private business or school. It gives you a better position to argue from and may remove the criminal penalties for doing so.

Short of Constitutional Carry; we have pretty good laws in this state. Permits are easy to get, except for the poor. We don’t need a permit to have a gun in our car. And if the use of deadly force is justified; weapons possession charges don’t apply.

The fight here is mostly between those of us that are part of a “Special Group” and business owners. I expect business owners will continue to win that fight. Unless something has changed recently we haven’t seen a documented case of someone being arrested for the simple act of carrying past a sign, on this forum.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They actually passed constitutional carry in Oklahoma, and the governor vetoed it. One of my idiot friends actually agreed with the veto because of training. He has a carry permit. I wanted to beat him in the head with my shoe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mikegideon said:

I wanted to beat him in the head with my shoe.

Should have, I will bail ya out.

On our state we have so many RINOs I am amazed we get anything passed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RED333 said:

Should have, I will bail ya out.

On our state we have so many RINOs I am amazed we get anything passed.

He's a hard core conservative. Just new to guns, I guess. His dad is a doctor, so I'm guessing he wasn't taught as a young un.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, bersaguy said:

Yes were do have a Republican Controlled Congress but we have a Rogue Governor that will veto almost any bill pertaining to guns that reaches his desk and I don't think we have enough power in Congress to over ride his veto. There are some Republicans that would side against a veto overthrow.I don't think it will get any better if Diane Black gets in! She is one of these people that talks the talk but won't walk the walk. .........JMHO

You do know that Congress is Federal, correct?  

The General Assembly only requires a majority to override a Governor's veto, so they have more than enough votes in both houses. 

What gun bill has the Gov. vetoed?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, quietguy said:

You do know that Congress is Federal, correct?  

The General Assembly only requires a majority to override a Governor's veto, so they have more than enough votes in both houses. 

What gun bill has the Gov. vetoed?  

A bill has to make it to his desk first to get vetoed. 🤨

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DaveTN said:

I don't think we need to model ourselves after another state; Constitutional Carry is pretty straight forward.

I suspect at some point Constitutional Carry will be put to a vote in this state. It would be a battle to get it passed; if it required a business owner to allow carry it would fail. That’s just my opinion; I could be wrong.

But even if we get it that doesn’t mean you will be able carry past a sign on a private business or school. It gives you a better position to argue from and may remove the criminal penalties for doing so.

Short of Constitutional Carry; we have pretty good laws in this state. Permits are easy to get, except for the poor. We don’t need a permit to have a gun in our car. And if the use of deadly force is justified; weapons possession charges don’t apply.

The fight here is mostly between those of us that are part of a “Special Group” and business owners. I expect business owners will continue to win that fight. Unless something has changed recently we haven’t seen a documented case of someone being arrested for the simple act of carrying past a sign, on this forum.

We may have come a long way, but not far enough.  When I say model after another state, I mean pick the parts that are good.  Yes I like constitutional carry also, but will it pass here?  Also,  I get the property owner thing, but I like the concept that carrying past a Do not carry sign would not be a crime, but simply grounds for the owner to ask you to leave.  Failing to leave  when asked is different.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

A bill has to make it to his desk first to get vetoed. 🤨

Exactly.  It's a legislative problem, not executive. 

The real issue is that Andy Holt, Matthew Hill, et al, are now shills for the TEA and TSEA.  They don't care about principals, just getting themselves re-elected. 

I'll take a fiscally conservative moderate Republican (read RINO) that stands on principal any day over a sell out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, quietguy said:

Exactly.  It's a legislative problem, not executive. 

The real issue is that Andy Holt, Matthew Hill, et al, are now shills for the TEA and TSEA.  They don't care about principals, just getting themselves re-elected. 

I'll take a fiscally conservative moderate Republican (read RINO) that stands on principal any day over a sell out.

It’s both. The legislature doesn’t put anything on the governor’s desk that the governor doesn’t want there. That’s not accidental. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

It’s both. The legislature doesn’t put anything on the governor’s desk that the governor doesn’t want there. That’s not accidental. 

He has allowed bills to become law without signing, so the legislature does indeed pass bills he does not entirely support.  Guns on campus is one, sanctuary cities is the latest.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Garufa said:

He has allowed bills to become law without signing, so the legislature does indeed pass bills he does not entirely support.  Guns on campus is one, sanctuary cities is the latest.

Fair enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2018 at 9:32 PM, Oh Shoot said:

yep, from 39-17-1359:

.....

.....
 
Boy - without getting overly technical - that sucks !
- OS

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2018 at 5:23 PM, Garufa said:

He has allowed bills to become law without signing, so the legislature does indeed pass bills he does not entirely support.  Guns on campus is one, sanctuary cities is the latest.

Same same, he doesn't sign them to look like a conservative to his base.  If he really didn't want it on his desk he would of had it killed in committee like some of the pro 2A bills.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has enough boot lickers in the legislature to see nothing will reach his desk that he doesn't favor.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Footer title

This content can be configured within your theme settings in your ACP. You can add any HTML including images, paragraphs and lists.

Footer title

This is an example of a list.

Footer title

This content can be configured within your theme settings in your ACP. You can add any HTML including images, paragraphs and lists.

Footer title

This content can be configured within your theme settings in your ACP. You can add any HTML including images, paragraphs and lists.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines