Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 86

Thread: Going to Tenn for vacation, questiosn.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Ky
    Posts
    27

    Going to Tenn for vacation, questiosn.

    I have some questions.

    I am becoming quite well versed in Kys, carry laws but I am not 100% sure on the laws in Tennessee.

    I will (hopefully) have my CCDW from Ky some time this week or next.
    Now assuming I have the CCDW permit, I can legally keep and carry OC/CC my firearm (does not cover some weapons in Tenn) with no issues correct?

    The state police say that they will uphold any carry laws that Ky has, as long as I have the permit.

    Now I am going on honeymoon, and would feel better if I had some form of protection around, seeing as I do not know anyone there and I am miles/hours away from any other family.
    But I don't want to cause a stir and ruin the honeymoon, I was thinking of getting a CC setup and just not rolling with the OC until I get back home as much as I hate to.

    I will be in the pigeon forge area.

    And any advice would be great, how is that area normally?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    Titan357:

    Tennesse Uses The Term '...with Intent to go Armed...'.

    Under Tennessee Law, This Intents Includes Firearms, Knives, and Clubs.

    The Exceptions are Listed under The Next Preceeding Law, and Handguns are Exempt for Those Non-Governmental Persons with Handgun Carry Permits.

    aadvark

  3. #3
    Regular Member SovereignAxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Elizabethton, TN
    Posts
    795
    I'm not sure what, if anything, you're asking specifically. AFAIK TN has reciprocity with KY permits, so you shouldn't have a problem.

    As for what it's like in the Pidgeon Forge/Gatlinburg area-crowded. It's a tourist heavy area, so lots of out-of-towners. In fact, I'd say that 75%+ of the people in that area at any given time are from out of town. So if you're looking to lay low on your honeymoon in that area-CC is the way to go.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Ky
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by aadvark View Post
    Titan357:

    Tennesse Uses The Term '...with Intent to go Armed...'.

    Under Tennessee Law, This Intents Includes Firearms, Knives, and Clubs.

    The Exceptions are Listed under The Next Preceeding Law, and Handguns are Exempt for Those Non-Governmental Persons with Handgun Carry Permits.

    aadvark
    Ok, so my Ky permit covers me then, and I can CC with no issues?
    If I decide to carry at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by SovereignAxe View Post
    I'm not sure what, if anything, you're asking specifically. AFAIK TN has reciprocity with KY permits, so you shouldn't have a problem.

    As for what it's like in the Pidgeon Forge/Gatlinburg area-crowded. It's a tourist heavy area, so lots of out-of-towners. In fact, I'd say that 75%+ of the people in that area at any given time are from out of town. So if you're looking to lay low on your honeymoon in that area-CC is the way to go.
    I was just wanting to make 100% sure that I can CC with my KY permit in TN. Sounds like I can, just wanted to be sure.

    I guess the OP was a bit of a mess and didn't really get my point across. I was just wondering what the area is like, and how secure the cabins and other areas are.
    I will have to pick up a CC holster some time soon then, once my permit comes back.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    TN honors/recognizes ALL other states' permits/license.

    With one you can OC or CC in TN.

    A permit/license is good for handguns only, no other weapons.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  6. #6
    Regular Member SovereignAxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Elizabethton, TN
    Posts
    795
    yeah, I forgot to mention, TN law makes no distinction between OC and CC. but you have to have a permit to do either one. so yeah, get your permit before you come here or you're a criminal

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallguy View Post
    TN honors/recognizes ALL other states' permits/license.

    With one you can OC or CC in TN.

    A permit/license is good for handguns only, no other weapons.
    TN only has reciprocity with 19 states per the TN Dept of Safety website:

    http://www.tn.gov/safety/handgun/reciprocity.shtml

    To the OP: KY is included. As long as you have a permit, you can carry open or concealed. The normal practice from what I have seen in heavily populated areas is concealed. I would recommend the same for Gatlinburg.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by SgtScott31 View Post
    TN only has reciprocity with 19 states per the TN Dept of Safety website:

    http://www.tn.gov/safety/handgun/reciprocity.shtml

    To the OP: KY is included. As long as you have a permit, you can carry open or concealed. The normal practice from what I have seen in heavily populated areas is concealed. I would recommend the same for Gatlinburg.
    Did you read the page you linked?

    The very first thing it says....

    Tennessee now recognizes a facially valid handgun permit, firearms permit, weapons permit, or a license issued by another state according to its terms, and will, therefore, authorize the holder of such out-of-state permit or license to carry a handgun only in the state of Tennessee.
    You can also check TN law 39-17-1351(r)(1) that says "A facially valid handgun permit, firearms permit, weapons permit or license issued by another state shall be valid in this state according to its terms and shall be treated as if it is a handgun permit issued by this state; provided, however, the provisions of this subsection (r) shall not be construed to authorize the holder of any out-of-state permit or license to carry, in this state, any firearm or weapon other than a handgun." See http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/tncode/

    Also www.handgunlaw.us on their TN page http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/tennessee.pdf

    Yes TN only has formal written agreements with 19 states, but that is not required for TN to honor other states permits also if you scroll on down the page you will notice several other states honor TN permits even though there is not a formal agreement.

    When carry laws were first being passed and new many states required formal agreements to honor other states permits, but many have now dropped this requirement and simply publish a list of states they will honor or choose to honor all states permits, like TN did in 2003 See Section 1 of Public Chapter 300 http://www.tn.gov/sos/acts/103/pub/pc0300.pdf of the 103rd General Assembly.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    NW Florida
    Posts
    79

    private property question

    I am Townsend/Cades Cove bound. Do "no firearms" or gunbuster signs have the force of tresspassing law in Tennesse or must you be verbally instructed to leave the premises?
    Last edited by 6-shooter; 08-20-2011 at 06:49 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by 6-shooter View Post
    I am Townsend/Cades Cove bound. Do "no firearms" or gunbuster signs have the force of tresspassing law in Tennesse or must you be verbally instructed to leave the premises?

    If the signs are posted per 39-17-1359 (see below) then Yes, they carry the weight of law. It is $500 fine. A "gunbuster" is a legal posting. State parks may have No Fireamrs signs, but they do not apply to permit holders. The reason being if the law that allowed carry in state parks required new signs to be posted, it would have added a fiscal note that probably would have defeated the bill.



    39-17-1359. Prohibition at certain meetings -- Posting notice.

    (a) (1) An individual, corporation, business entity or local, state or federal government entity or agent thereof is authorized to prohibit the possession of weapons by any person who is at a meeting conducted by, or on property owned, operated, or managed or under the control of the individual, corporation, business entity or government entity.

    (2) The prohibition in subdivision (a)(1) shall apply to any person who is authorized to carry a firearm by authority of 39-17-1351.

    (b) (1) Notice of the prohibition permitted by subsection (a) shall be accomplished by displaying one (1) or both of the notices described in subdivision (b)(3) in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited. Either form of notice used shall be of a size that is plainly visible to the average person entering the building, property, or portion of the building or property, posted.

    (2) The notice required by this section shall be in English, but a duplicate notice may also be posted in any language used by patrons, customers or persons who frequent the place where weapon possession is prohibited.

    (3) (A) If a sign is used as the method of posting, it shall contain language substantially similar to the following:

    AS AUTHORIZED BY T.C.A. 39-17-1359, POSSESSION OF A WEAPON ON POSTED PROPERTY OR IN A POSTED BUILDING IS PROHIBITED AND IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.

    (B) As used in this section, "language substantially similar to" means the sign contains language plainly stating that:

    (i) The property is posted under authority of Tennessee law;

    (ii) Weapons or firearms are prohibited on the property, in the building, or on the portion of the property or building that is posted; and

    (iii) Possessing a weapon in an area that has been posted is a criminal offense.

    (C) A building, property or a portion of a building or property, shall be considered properly posted in accordance with this section if one (1) or both of the following is displayed in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited:

    (i) The international circle and slash symbolizing the prohibition of the item within the circle; or

    (ii) The posting sign described in this subdivision (b)(3).

    (c) (1) It is an offense to possess a weapon in a building or on property that is properly posted in accordance with this section.

    (2) Possession of a weapon on posted property in violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by fine only of five hundred dollars ($500).

    (d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter, reduce or eliminate any civil or criminal liability that a property owner or manager may have for injuries arising on their property.

    (e) The provisions of this section shall not apply to title 70 regarding wildlife laws, rules and regulations.

    (f) This section shall not apply to the grounds of any public park, natural area, historic park, nature trail, campground, forest, greenway, waterway or other similar public place that is owned or operated by the state, a county, a municipality or instrumentality thereof. The carrying of firearms in those areas shall be governed by 39-17-1311.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    NW Florida
    Posts
    79
    (2) Possession of a weapon on posted property in violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by fine only of five hundred dollars ($500).


    Thanks. In in view of the above I know how to handle it.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    158
    Thanks for the clarification.

    I will say with regards to violating 39-17-1359 and carrying where it is prohibited, we have commonly charged persons with 39-17-1307 (unlawful carry) and their weapon was seized. This is a monthly occurrence in Nashville from those who bring a firearm into the airport contrary to the signs posted on the front doors. I'm not referring to those traveling with firearms (in checked luggage) and have declared them. I'm talking about people who walk through the security checkpoint and forget the gun is in his/her bag when flying out. Federal issues aside, on the local level they're in violation of carrying where firearms are prohibited. The courts commonly impose fines, probation, and/or forfeiture of the weapon.
    Last edited by SgtScott31; 08-22-2011 at 12:09 AM.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by SgtScott31 View Post
    Thanks for the clarification.

    I will say with regards to violating 39-17-1359 and carrying where it is prohibited, we have commonly charged persons with 39-17-1307 (unlawful carry) and their weapon was seized. This is a monthly occurrence in Nashville from those who bring a firearm into the airport contrary to the signs posted on the front doors. I'm not referring to those traveling with firearms (in checked luggage) and have declared them. I'm talking about people who walk through the security checkpoint and forget the gun is in his/her bag when flying out. Federal issues aside, on the local level they're in violation of carrying where firearms are prohibited. The courts commonly impose fines, probation, and/or forfeiture of the weapon.
    39-17-1359 is for places that it would be otherwise lawful for a person with a permit to carry. Not places like schools, rooms where judicial proceedings are taken place etc..that are off-limits regardless of a permit or not. If you carry in those places (permit or not) you have violated that specific law. So if I'm in a grocery store, restaurant, doctors office, bank etc.... it is legal for me to carry if I have permit and they are not posted per 39-17-1359. If they are posted per 39-17-1359 and I carry, I have violated 39-17-1359, not 39-17-1307. If I carry at a school (who don't post per 39-17-1359) I have violated 39-17-1309 and figure I would be charged with that, if I didn't have a permit I guess I might also be charged with 39-17-1307.

    39-17-1307 is the law that makes it illegal to have a firearm ANYWHERE in TN period, not any specific place. There are defenses/exceptions to the law, like if the gun is unloaded, you are at your house, you are a LEO or if you have a Handgun Carry Permit among others. There is no TN law against carry in airport so are you sure it's a state law they are being charged with a not a federal one? Because having a HCP is supposed to be a defense to 39-17-1307, but as stated above it wouldn't be if you were carrying in a place otherwise off-limits by state or federal law.

    Also just for clarification......until last week, would you have charged someone with carrying a firearm even if they had a permit, if it wasn't from one of the 19 states with formal reciprocity?
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    158
    39-17-1307 is the law that makes it illegal to have a firearm ANYWHERE in TN period, not any specific place. There are defenses/exceptions to the law, like if the gun is unloaded, you are at your house, you are a LEO or if you have a Handgun Carry Permit among others.
    I'm aware of 1307, thanks.

    There is no TN law against carry in airport so are you sure it's a state law they are being charged with a not a federal one?
    Hence why the 1359 posting is on the front doors of the terminal and anywhere on airport property. The feds don't charge them criminally. TSA hits them with a civil penalty ($2500 - $7k, but I'm sure arrangements are made). Once you decide to carry somewhere where it's prohibited, I believe 1307 applies, as do the courts in Nashville. You are no longer carrying lawfully if you intentionally carry it somewhere where it is not allowed. Although 1359 says is punishable by fine only, it also advises it is a criminal act, where I would say 1307 is applicable. The warrants/affidavits that are provided do not indicate a specific charge for violating 1359, which is why I believe 1307 has to step in. 1359 sets the standard for the fine amount, but 1307 moves in for the criminal aspect, which is an A or B misdemeanor and forfeiture of the weapon commonly occurs.

    Also just for clarification......until last week, would you have charged someone with carrying a firearm even if they had a permit, if it wasn't from one of the 19 states with formal reciprocity?
    Nope.
    Last edited by SgtScott31; 08-22-2011 at 06:23 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by SgtScott31 View Post
    Hence why the 1359 posting is on the front doors of the terminal and anywhere on airport property. The feds don't charge them criminally. TSA hits them with a civil penalty ($2500 - $7k, but I'm sure arrangements are made). Once you decide to carry somewhere where it's prohibited, I believe 1307 applies, as do the courts in Nashville. You are no longer carrying lawfully if you intentionally carry it somewhere where it is not allowed. Although 1359 says is punishable by fine only, it also advises it is a criminal act, where I would say 1307 is applicable. The warrants/affidavits that are provided do not indicate a specific charge for violating 1359, which is why I believe 1307 has to step in. 1359 sets the standard for the fine amount, but 1307 moves in for the criminal aspect, which is an A or B misdemeanor and forfeiture of the weapon commonly occurs.
    If you have a carry permit I don't think you would be convicted of 39-17-1307 as having a permit is clearly a defense to that charge.

    Violating 39-17-1359 is a crime itself, as it says in the law. It is just that the law limits the punishment to a fine only and no jail time.

    If you have a permit and do carry somewhere it is prohibited, you violate whatever law that prohibits carry there...

    39-17-1306 - Any room where a judicial proceeding is taking place
    39-17-1309 - Schools
    39-17-1311 - Some local parks
    39-16-201 - Any Penal Institution
    39-17-1359 - Places posted per 39-17-1359
    Any place off-limits per Federal Law

    You should be charged with a violation of one the laws above, not 39-17-1307.

    Can you cite an actual case and where to look it up, of someone that had a valid permit, carried past a 39-17-1359 sign and was charged and/or convicted of 39-17-1307?

    Of course in Nashville, nothing would surprise me either. So overall I may just have to agree to disagree with you.
    Last edited by Fallguy; 08-22-2011 at 06:52 PM.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    158
    I haven't found any case law on that specific issue through Westlaw or Lexis. If the DA's office wanted us to charge them specifically using 1359 and not 1307, then I would like to think they would have addressed it by now. Although 1359 outlines that it is a class B misdemeanor and fine only for violation, I don't believe it is out of context to use 1307 instead. When you are not carrying lawfully, you are violating 1307, hence "unlawful" carry w/intent to go armed. Regardless if the unlawful action is by ignoring the posted sign (pursuant to 1359). Maybe that's the angle the DAs office (and courts) take when they argue it. I'm not familiar with anyone that my agency has ever arrested who has fought this specific charge. Although 1359 says no jail time and a fine, it doesn't say that forfeiture of the weapon is not possible. Either way, I think you can lose your gun under either law. In my opinion, 1359 only outlines how and where to post a prohibition sign and penalties for violating it. I think you can use either statute, but that's me.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    I acknowledge that having a permit is only a defense to 1307, so it doesn't mean one can't be charged and if the judge/jury rejected the defense (for some reason) I guess you could be convicted.

    So far it seems this discussion has been limited to the airport. Are you aware of this being done at any other location?

    Also the times at the airport, was this anywhere in the airport or just at the security checkpoint? If it was at the security checkpoint I think that is a violations of 18 U.S.C. 922(e), so I could see that rendering a permit invalid.

    Although I think it is "overkill" I can see a DA deciding to charge 1307 instead of 1359 at locations other than the security checkpoint at the airport, simply because it is the airport. Of course if the person doesn't have a permit, then 1307 would be the charge anyway as 1359 only applies to permit holders. Also only 3-4% of TN residents have a HCP so the odds are most don't have a permit.

    I'm just saying that "in general" I don't think a violation of 1359 means you can or at least will always be charged with 1307 (especially through out the state), but I concede that it has been your experience. But like I said above, if they didn't have a permit they really can't violate 1359 only 1307.

    I also agree that violation of any weapons law can result in seizure of the weapon.

    I appreciate the discussion and I know I have come off a bit gruff at time, I apologize for that.
    Last edited by Fallguy; 08-22-2011 at 11:14 PM.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    158
    Although I have charged folks outside of the main terminal (i.e. traffic stops), a majority of times it occurs at the checkpoint. You would be very surprised at the amount of permit holders who mistakenly forget and plop their bag on the xray belt with a loaded handgun in it. Although US Code could also apply (such as the one you mentioned), I have only seen the feds step in and charge a holder once criminally, but he was a convicted felon, so the circumstances were different. Almost always TSA steps in with a civil penalty though.

    I appreciate the discussion and I know I have come off a bit gruff at time, I apologize for that.
    Not a problem. I enjoy it too. One of the nicer discussions I have encountered on OC.org.

    I think we can both agree that either charge can be applied. Although 1359 may be the easier one where a permit holder is concerned, 1307 is the one our guys are accustomed to applying when they encounter a firearm anywhere in the building. Honestly, I don't always remember the "B misdemeanor/fine only" language in the 1359 statute. I remember 1359 advising only that violation of the posted sign is punishable as a criminal offense/act. If one had to decide which criminal offense, 1307 seemed to be the only one that would be applicable. Like you mentioned earlier, the legislation has enacted many statutes that make it a crime to carry in a specific place, such as a school. I guess 1359 is a charge that is a catch all for those who want to prohibit weapons in their facility, but to us it was more of a law that governed how to prohibit weapons, specifically outlining the proper signage. Either way when it involved permit holders, the District Attorney's office normally lowered the charge and/or retired it if the person didn't have a criminal history. Since a majority of those were permit holders, that was usually the case. While I know those who are HCP holders had no true intention to carry their gun on a plane, we don't have much discretion when it comes to a firearm at the checkpoint. Honestly I would much rather deal with the local charge than the federal fine coming later by TSA.

    p.s. I think I can recall two times I arrested a HCP holder outside of the terminal. Both were on traffic stops. One involved a guy that was DUI and he was charged with poss handgun under influence. The other involved a guy who had drugs in the vehicle and his weapon's serial number was filed. Doh!
    Last edited by SgtScott31; 08-23-2011 at 01:09 AM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    I'm pretty sure if someone violates 1359 it's not a matter of choosing which criminal offense...the offense is against 1359 as said in subsection (c) of 1359 Yes 1359 gives how to post, but that is not the only purpose of it. Just like 1309 and 1311 state what an offense is and mention postings, but are each their own violation of the law. The $500 fine only part has always been in there. Clarifying that is a Class B Misdemeanor is fairly new.

    I agree someone with a HCP can be charged (at places posted or not) if they are violating the law such as being intoxicated and in possession, having a illegal weapon, being a convicted felon (although shouldn't have a HCP) in possession, carrying at a school and so on. And I'm sure it happens as you point out.

    I guess my main point has been that (IMO) if someone is only violating the provisions of 1359, then that is the only law they are violating, not 1307. If a person with a permit is carrying in a laundry mat that has posted per 1359, but is not otherwise violating any other law. Then that person is only violating 1359 and not 1307 or some other law.

    One last question...other than at the security check point... Has anyone with a permit ever been charged with (and/or convicted of) 1307 who was only violating 1359 and no other law (federal or state) like being intoxicated, filed of ser #, convicted felon etc... at the airport?

    Dang...not too smart of the HCP holders you mention on the traffic stops.
    Last edited by Fallguy; 08-23-2011 at 12:36 PM.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    158
    That's a question that I can't yet answer. I have used every search term available on Westlaw and every 1307 case that has come up only involved someone who was charged without a HCP. That's not to suggest it hasn't happened, but I'm pretty sure Westlaw/Lexis only publish cases that have gone above the Circuit level. I think one of two things has happened: either (1) a HCP holder has yet to challenge it up to the appellate level or (2) the ADA has always given a plea to a lesser charge that is more beneficial then spending the money to take it to trial and/or appeals

    I understand your point about only charging the HCP holder with violating 1359 if that's technically the only thing he/she is violating. I just think it's not out of the realm that an officer can elect to use either 1359 or 1307. If they're carrying unlawfully, then 1307 is applicable, even if there's another statute that may fit the situation better. An ADA may elect to use 1307 because it's a higher penalty (A misdm instead of B) depending on the circumstances.

    p.s. I wanted to elaborate that the convicted felon was not a HCP holder. When I said "holder," I meant that he was in possession of the handgun. Sorry about that.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    I was really just asking in your own personal experience at the airport.

    However I've never been able to find or even heard of a person being charged with 39-17-1359 either. Neither has anyone on another gun forum I'm on...that is one reason I perused this a bit more with you. I think one reason we are having trouble finding any cases are in the end most private business post because they don't want firearms on their property, so if the person agrees to leave (assuming they entered in the first place), I figure most times that's the end of it.

    If a person has a HCP and is only violating 1359 the main reason I don't think 1307 applies is because 1308(a)(2) clearly says having a HCP is a defense to the application of 1307. Just as several other circumstance/people are in other parts of 1308.

    AFAIK I'm not coming to the airport anytime soon, but when/if I do and your on duty, first cup of coffee is on me.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    158
    Now that you mention it, I've never seen anyone charged specifically with 1359 either. When I type that code into Westlaw, no cases come up. Next time I'm downtown, I will also look in our affidavit/warrant templates to see if there's one listed for 1359. As far as personal experience, I'm not familiar with any of our officers specifically using 1307 when we have caught someone carrying in the airport away from the checkpoint. With that said, I think that's the only applicable charge to use at the checkpoint as well. Although there are federal charges for carrying at a federal checkpoint, I can't think of another local charge we would use related to weapons. We could also use the airport/aircraft security charge, but that's a catch all charge to anyone that attempts to gain access to the sterile area of an airport without proper screening. You're right that having a HCP is a defense to 1307, but it's an affirmative defense, meaning that it's on the burden of the HCP holder to show to the court they were not violating 1307. I think if they're carrying in a building where there are big red signs (conforming with 1359 ), they're going to be fighting an uphill battle saying that they were carrying in compliance/lawfully.

    Either way, it would make for some good arguments. I would like to be involved in case where these issues are addressed. I'll keep digging.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    When you have caught someone with a HCP carrying in the airport away from the checkpoint, what have you charged them with?

    I don't see the word "affirmative" anywhere in 1308. 1310 list defenses to 1309 and says they are affirmative defenses to prosecution. So since affirmative is left out of 1308, I don't think that is the case that they are affirmative defenses. 1308 says the list of defense in it are a defense to the application of 1307. To me that means if you meet one of those defenses 1307 does not apply. Such as if the weapon is unloaded, you are on your own property, you are an out of state LEO and so on. What you have to show is that weapon is unloaded, you are on your own property, you are an out state LEO or that you have a HCP, then that means 1307 does not apply.

    If you are carrying in a building with a big red sign that conforms to 1359 I agree you are not carrying lawfully...You are violating 1359, but that is all you are violating and that is what applies.

    I look forward to hearing any information you can find.
    Last edited by Fallguy; 08-23-2011 at 07:51 PM.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    158
    To me that means if you meet one of those defenses 1307 does not apply.
    Just because you have a defense to 1307 listed under 1308 (by having a HCP) doesn't mean it's going to be a successful one. It's definitely an argument on your side that you will let the DA know you're going to present. If I charge you with 1307 inside the terminal building (or any building with a 1359 posting), just because you have a HCP pursuant to a 1308 defense doesn't mean it's an automatic win. The prosecution will argue the fact that your HCP isn't valid in a facility where it's prohibited pursuant to 1359, which is why you're no longer lawfully carrying the weapon and 1307 would apply. At least that's how I would argue it.

    For some reason I thought it was an affirmative defense. After looking through 1307/1308 I don't see it either. I thought it was off the top of my head, which is what I get for posting it without verifying.

    If you are carrying in a building with a big red sign that conforms to 1359 I agree you are not carrying lawfully...You are violating 1359, but that is all you are violating and that is what applies.
    Here is where you and I can agree to disagree. I believe any time you are carrying unlawfully in this state, you can be charged with 1307. The text of the statute reads "unlawful carry w/intent to go armed." You are not carrying lawfully if you are violating the 1359 posting by carrying where it's prohibited. I agree that 1359 would be the more appropriate charge, but I have yet to verify that it's even a criminal offense that is used for those who carry where it's posted. Since it says it's a B misdemeanor and punishable by fine only, you would think it is, but I'm concerned with the fact that there is not one case listed on Westlaw involving 1359.
    Last edited by SgtScott31; 08-23-2011 at 08:20 PM.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    So you are saying someone with a firearm on their own property could be charged with a violation of 1307 and they would have to go to court and prove they were on their own property? Or that someone on the way to the firing range with an unloaded weapon and no ammo (going to buy it at the range) could be charged and have to go to court and prove it was unloaded. I guess technically that may be true (there is the old saying you may beat the charge, but you can't beat the ride), but I'd sure hate to be the officer that presented the charges knowing the people have a valid defense per 1308.

    If you charge someone with a valid permit with a violation of 1307 because they are in a place posted per 1359 I bet you that cup of coffee you'll loose. If you charge them with 1359 you'd probably win.

    Why aren't people that unlawfully carry per 1306, 1309, 1311 charged with 1307 instead of 1306, 1309 or 1311?
    You may find cases where they were also charged with 1307, but I bet none of those people had a HCP. If they had a HCP and were only violating 1306, 1309 or 1311 I'd bet 1306, 1309 or 1311 is all they were charged with and 1307 also.

    Just because no one has ever been charged with a law, doesn't mean it isn't a valid charge.

    Sounds like you have contact with a DA. Ask them if 1359 is a criminal charge in-and-of-itself. Also ask them if someone has a valid HCP and is in a place with a 1359 posting, but otherwise acting lawfully if they would be charged with 1359 or 1307.
    Last edited by Fallguy; 08-23-2011 at 08:59 PM.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •