Jump to content

House Rejects Senate Guns In Bars Bill


Recommended Posts

So if I read you correctly - if/when this passes we'll be able to carry into any establishment that serves by the drink?
Depends on the wording of the bill. If it defines "age restricted" then no. As most if not all "bars" or "Saloons" are now age restricted so that they can allow smoking in accordance with the new smoking bans.

One thing to remember is....with or without any of the restrictions, the bill would only allow carry in restaurants as defined in the bill.

Now who knows what versions is liable to finally come out of things, but the first amendement to the House bill defines "age-restricted" as....

As used in this subdivision ©(3), “age-restricted ” means a restaurant that affirmatively restricts access to its buildings or facilities to persons who are eighteen (18) years of age or older by requiring each person who attempts to gain entry to those buildings or facilities to submit for inspection an acceptable form of identification for the express purpose of determining if the person is eighteen (18) years of age or older;

The key part of that definition is "requiring each person who attempts to gain entry to those buildings or facilities to submit for inspection an acceptable form of identification"

One could argue that if they don't card you at the door, it is not age-restricted per that definition, even if by rule or whatever they only allow those 18 and up in.

Edited by Fallguy
Link to comment
  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks, guys. It looks like there may be a few 'growing pains' as we figure out the intricacies of how they are planning on enforcing some of these gray areas. I had forgotten about the age restriction amendment, so yah, if that makes the final law, that will be obvious. But heck, when I go to the Flying Saucer (and get there before 8PM) they're not carding people even though it supposedly 21 or older all the time...

Link to comment
Depends on the wording of the bill. If it defines "age restricted" then no. As most if not all "bars" or "Saloons" are now age restricted so that they can allow smoking in accordance with the new smoking bans.

That's kind of the way I was seeing it. Most of the Bars I go into (not many I must confess) only added age restrictions once the Smoking Ban was inacted.

Edited by DavidD
Link to comment
So if I read you correctly - if/when this passes we'll be able to carry into any establishment that serves by the drink?

We'll be able to carry in pretty much establishment which has a 'restaurant liquor license' which is well over 90% of the places that serve liquor, hotels are a maybe, most of the 'other' licenses will be a no.

Keep in mind this is assuming they don't card at the door (21+) or are properly posted.

Link to comment
Depends on the wording of the bill. If it defines "age restricted" then no. As most if not all "bars" or "Saloons" are now age restricted so that they can allow smoking in accordance with the new smoking bans.

It's only age restricted if they card at the door, not if they post a sign.

Link to comment
Guest kcnative

Since the "21+" designation is in the vast majority of case to allow for smoking, I would say that if smoking is allowed, it is considered by law to be 21+. I don't see how one would argue you could both smoke and carry in an establishment. Either the person who is carrying or the restaurant (by allowing smoking) is breaking the law.

Link to comment
Since the "21+" designation is in the vast majority of case to allow for smoking, I would say that if smoking is allowed, it is considered by law to be 21+. I don't see how one would argue you could both smoke and carry in an establishment. Either the person who is carrying or the restaurant (by allowing smoking) is breaking the law.

You're right....if a place that allows smoking doesn't card people as they enter...they are technically breaking the law. 39-17-1804(1) You can see the defintion of "age-restricted" as it applies to smoking in 39-17-1802(2)

Also if a place has a big "NO ONE UNDER 21 ALLOWED" sign...I admit I would not want to try to argue with the judge that since they didn't card, they are not technically an "age-restricted venue"

Link to comment
Since the "21+" designation is in the vast majority of case to allow for smoking, I would say that if smoking is allowed, it is considered by law to be 21+. I don't see how one would argue you could both smoke and carry in an establishment. Either the person who is carrying or the restaurant (by allowing smoking) is breaking the law.

The restaurant is breaking the law, but currently the local health inspectors aren't enforcing this.

It's not different than saying a sign with a handgun and a circle/line through it isn't a properly posted building and therefore you can still carry.

Technically you're not breaking the law, but there is a slight risk you might have to get a lawyer to prove it.

I suspect that we'll see some LEOs who don't fully understand the law at first and it will take some run-ins before things settle down.

But, age restricted venue is clearing defined in the law as a place that requires everybody entering to show ID (and be restricted to 21+). If they don't do that, they're not an age restricted venue under the law.

Link to comment
Guest kcnative

Interesting.

NONE of the restaurants I've frequented that allow smoking (3-4, but most of them pretty regularly) have carded me at the door. I've only actually been carded ordering a drink once. Some of them didn't even have a sign.

EDIT: Actually one of them did now that I think of it, as I was going to see a band and they did card me and give me a wristband. That one was in M'boro.

Edited by kcnative
postscript
Link to comment
Guest sstouder
Well, when does this go back to the Senate?

the website says that the senate has "refused to recede from am. 1" and that its on the House calendar for 04/30

Link to comment
Interesting.

NONE of the restaurants I've frequented that allow smoking (3-4, but most of them pretty regularly) have carded me at the door. I've only actually been carded ordering a drink once. Some of them didn't even have a sign.

EDIT: Actually one of them did now that I think of it, as I was going to see a band and they did card me and give me a wristband. That one was in M'boro.

I'd guess if they are using wristbands that means they're allowing 18-20 year olds into the building as well (Only time I've seen wrist bands used were to tell the difference between 21+ and others)...

If that is the case it's not an age restricted venue under the law. They must card and only allow 21+ into the building.

Link to comment
I'd guess if they are using wristbands that means they're allowing 18-20 year olds into the building as well (Only time I've seen wrist bands used were to tell the difference between 21+ and others)...

If that is the case it's not an age restricted venue under the law. They must card and only allow 21+ into the building.

See post 51.

For purposes of carry in restaurants that serve alcohol they defined age restricted as any place restricts admission to those 18 and up, not 21 and up.

So yes, for smoking it is 21+ per 39-17-1802(2) but not for carry in restaurants that serve alcohol. Both definitions apply only to the parts of the law they say they do.

Link to comment
Guest pws_smokeyjones

Latest Update for those who could not watch the live video stream of today's House session. The house passed Rep. Todd's requests to have this bill go to conference committee. The members that were assigned to that committee were Todd, McCord, Armstrong, Bass and Casada.

Pretty sure the next step will be for the Senate to appoint conf. committee members and then the committee will meet to work out language that they can all agree on.

Link to comment
Latest Update for those who could not watch the live video stream of today's House session. The house passed Rep. Todd's requests to have this bill go to conference committee. The members that were assigned to that committee were Todd, McCord, Armstrong, Bass and Casada.

Pretty sure the next step will be for the Senate to appoint conf. committee members and then the committee will meet to work out language that they can all agree on.

"rep curry todd" rep.curry.todd@capitol.tn.gov

"rep joe mccord" rep.joe.mccord@capitol.tn.gov

"rep joe armstrong" rep.joe.armstrong@capitol.tn.gov

"rep eddie bass" rep.eddie.bass@capitol.tn.gov

"rep glen casada" rep.glen.casada@capitol.tn.gov

Send them all an email now!

Link to comment

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

THE FINE PRINT

Tennessee Gun Owners (TNGunOwners.com) is the premier Community and Discussion Forum for gun owners, firearm enthusiasts, sportsmen and Second Amendment proponents in the state of Tennessee and surrounding region.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is a presentation of Enthusiast Productions. The TGO state flag logo and the TGO tri-hole "icon" logo are trademarks of Tennessee Gun Owners. The TGO logos and all content presented on this site may not be reproduced in any form without express written permission. The opinions expressed on TGO are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the site's owners or staff.

Before engaging in any transaction of goods or services on TGO, all parties involved must know and follow the local, state and Federal laws regarding those transactions. TGO makes no claims, guarantees or assurances regarding any such transactions.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines
 
We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.