February 12, 2013, 08:54 AM | #1 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 5, 2012
Location: Memphis
Posts: 468
|
TN passes PRO gun bill
Surprisingly the state of TN yesterday passed a bill allowing handgun carry permit holders to store firearms in vehicles parked almost everywhere despite property owners or employer's wishes. This includes school and college campuses.
The bill passed on a 28-5 vote. I love this quote from the bills sponsor. Quote:
Keep it up TN! |
|
February 12, 2013, 08:57 AM | #2 |
Junior Member
Join Date: February 11, 2013
Posts: 6
|
An armed society is a polite and safer society.
|
February 12, 2013, 09:28 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
It doesn't help with your office, and I'd have to check if it was WA law I read, or Fed Law, but I remember something about parents/guardians picking up and dropping off children from school with a carry permit being exempt from the Gun Free Zone. Didn't sound like you could walk into a PTA meeting, or the principle's office with it, but you could idle on the loop waiting... again that also may be WA law, which wouldn't help in TN.
|
February 12, 2013, 09:34 AM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2013
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 182
|
How does the state enforce such a law? Have they removed my right to eject people from my property for whatever reason I see fit? I get allowing guns in vehicles on public property, schools, city buildings etc. But, telling a private property owner what they must allow on their property rubs me the wrong way. I have no issue with people keeping guns in their cars, but the principle is what bugs me. Don't tell me I can't boot someone off my land for any reason I see fit.
|
February 12, 2013, 09:38 AM | #5 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 13, 2008
Location: Hermit's Peak
Posts: 623
|
NM has in their laws specific allowances for anyone over the age of 19 and a legal owner to have their guns in their cars on school grounds. You do not need a CCW license. There are no other state-prohibited locations as far as areas accessed by vehicle that you need be concerned about.
Good for TN on addressing the issue. |
February 12, 2013, 09:47 AM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
Quote:
The bill would amend Tennessee criminal law so that it would not be a crime for an individual to have a firearm in his vehicle, hidden from observation, where he is otherwise entitled to be. Significantly, the bill would also shield property owners from civil liability arising from the presence of those arms.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
February 12, 2013, 10:04 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2013
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 182
|
I did not realize it was a crime in Tennessee to possess a gun on private property if the owner did not allow it. As long as they are not forcing property owners to allow weapons I don't have an issue with it.
|
February 12, 2013, 10:21 AM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
Title 39, which this bill would revise, is part of Tennessee's criminal code.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
February 12, 2013, 01:32 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
100% agree with the bill, if and only if, private businesses, schools, and individuals can still legally ask the firearms owner to leave.
Which it sounds like the case, so whoopee.
__________________
I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor |
February 12, 2013, 01:37 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
The bill proposes a sort of epistemological question. If the weapon involved is not subject to normal observation, on what basis would a property owner ask an individual to leave?
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
February 12, 2013, 02:50 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
Zukiphile great question.
There really isn't any. However the right to do so, even if theoretically improbably, needs to be sustained.
__________________
I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor |
February 12, 2013, 04:43 PM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 29, 2008
Location: East TN
Posts: 2,649
|
Quote:
Huh... Why has no one told me this??!!? Joking aside I'm glad to know I live in a free state, for now.
__________________
Sgt. of Marines, 5th Award Expert Rifle, 237/250 Expert Pistol, 382/400. D Co, 4th CEB, Engineers UP!! If you start a thread, be active in it. Don't leave us hanging. OEF 2011 Sangin, Afg. Molon Labe |
|
February 13, 2013, 06:44 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 17, 2008
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 265
|
Passed the House today, in six minutes!
Way to go TN! |
February 13, 2013, 06:46 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 17, 2008
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 265
|
Excuse me, passed house subcommittee in 6 minutes.
Now it goes on for a full house vote. |
February 13, 2013, 07:30 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,970
|
Good on ya TENN.
|
February 14, 2013, 10:15 AM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 29, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 101
|
Quote:
This bill only makes it legal for an employee to have a gun locked in a car in a parking lot that is posted against firearms and takes civil liability from an employer if an employee misuses a gun on their property. I don't think this bill will affect the lives of very many Tennesseans with HCPs. An employer can still ask to search your private vehicle and fire you if you refuse, or for no reason at all.
__________________
Patrick |
|
February 15, 2013, 11:21 PM | #17 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
James Yeager?
Did Yeager testify at the committee meeting of the elected officials?
What?... Too soon?... Lol. Good job 2A supporters & gun owners in the Volunteer state. |
February 16, 2013, 08:56 AM | #18 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 12, 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 556
|
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
||
February 16, 2013, 09:03 AM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2013
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 182
|
"In Georgia, it wasn't that private property owners were not allowed to control their property but rather the GA legislature or court said that one's vehicle is an extension of their private property. So I can have guns, alcohol (not opened of course) or whatever in my car and the parking lot's owner has no say what is in my car. But once I take it out of my car, it is no longer on my private property but the parking lot's property"
I understand. My point was, as a property owner, I can tell you to remove your vehicle or your person from my property for any reason I see fit. If I don't like a gun I know you have or see you have in your vehicle I can tell you to leave, I do not have to tell you why I am asking you to leave. My concern was maintaining property rights, I do not really like it the government starts telling what I may or may not allow on my property. We have enough of that already. My concern is the more we allow the government to tell us what we must allow on our private property we also sort of open the legal door for them telling us more stuff we "may not" have on our property. |
February 16, 2013, 08:15 PM | #20 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 24, 2011
Posts: 730
|
Overheard says:
Quote:
If that store, motel, or business cannot restrict who enters or works on that property (try the Americans with Disabilities Act as well as other "non-discrimination" acts...why could those places restrict a fundimental right, especially when it concerns the visitor's own private property (his vehicle)? Now, for your home, that is a different matter, you do not have to allow the visitor's vehicle on your property. If you have a business that is open to the public, you have no private property rights...just try discriminate against a protected group and you will soon find out. |
|
February 16, 2013, 08:27 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2013
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 182
|
Must I also allow my employees to exercise their other natural rights? Must I allow their freedom of speech/expression? If they have a klan sticker on their vehicle must I allow them to park it on my property? I would say no, I don't.
I may not fire an employee that is a member of a protected class for being a member of that protected class. I also may not eject them from my store, for example, for being a member of a protected class. Now I don't own a business anymore, so it doesn't really impact me. Also, in VA, our attorney general just put out an opinion that a property owner may say employees cannot keep guns in their vehicle on the property if they wish. I agree with that decision. As I said, I have no problem with people keeping gun in their vehicles on my property. And, it should not be an issue unless the person that has the gun in their vehicle makes in an issue. |
February 16, 2013, 11:32 PM | #22 |
Staff
Join Date: October 13, 2001
Posts: 3,355
|
You don't have to let your employees have guns in their cars, parked on your commercial property. You can modify their employment agreement so they have to park elsewhere, or you can fire them if they're somehow dangerous or careless with their firearms.
Prohibiting people from having guns in their cars in a work parking lot is bad. It infringes upon the employees' rights as they travel to and from work. On residential private property, you can do anything you want. On commercial private property, the rights of employees and customers who are behaving lawfully must be balanced against the rights of the owner.
__________________
“The egg hatched...” “...the egg hatched... and a hundred baby spiders came out...” (blade runner) “Who are you?” “A friend. I'm here to prevent you from making a mistake.” “You have no idea what I'm doing here, friend.” “In specific terms, no, but I swore an oath to protect the world...” (continuum) “It's a goal you won't understand until later. Your job is to make sure he doesn't achieve the goal.” (bsg) |
February 17, 2013, 08:49 AM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2013
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 182
|
The federal government is allowed to tell me I cannot carry a weapon onto a military base, and that seems to have past the constitutional muster. But, as a private property owner I cannot do the same thing?
I think the solution, for me, if I felt strongly about the issue, would be to tell all employees they cannot park on the property. I am concerned about property rights, but , also, I don't understand why people feel the need to make this an issue. If you want to carry a gun in your car carry a gun. Don't advertise that fact. As long as it is not against state law it should never be an issue. |
February 18, 2013, 08:44 AM | #24 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
A bit of clarification may prevent undue development of some concerns expressed.
Quote:
As a practical consequence of such a law, a business owner would not be able to give criminal law status to his wish to prohibit those he invites onto his property from possessing arms concealed in their cars. Quote:
The protection described in this bill is very narrow.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; February 18, 2013 at 11:19 AM. |
||
February 19, 2013, 11:08 AM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 17, 2008
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 265
|
Code:
If you want to carry a gun in your car carry a gun. Don't advertise that fact. But lets just say you own a business that has experienced some thefts and wish to search all vehicles at the end of a shift in an attempt to find the culprit(s). During these searches you find an employee with a carry permit has kept their personel protection properly secured in their vehicle during that shift. If that employee has not done anything offensive or unlawful, they should be protected from termination just because their carry beliefs are different than your carry beliefs. It is no different than terminating an employee because you witnessed them entering a place of worship that differs from your place of worship. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|