Tennesse libraries move to ban gun carry

[kwikrnu]

imported post

The problem with TN is the laws are unclear, confusing, and contradictary. There was no law law that said handguns couldn't be carried into a park and a judge said it was against the law. Laws say parks must now be posted to prohibit carrying of handguns, but most are not posted and the AG says they don't have to be posted. Schools are supposed to be posted too, but case law shows that they don't. The restaurant carry law was just declared unconstitutional because it was vague. We have a law that says you're not to be convicted if you use a gun on school property in self defense. Last year a man who used his gun on school grounds for self defense was convicted. I have no doubt that anyone carrying a handgun into a library which was posted would be convicted.

When Tennessee put together the permit system of carry back in 1994 they should have done a better job writing the laws, but they didn't. They continue to write confusing laws. I'm to the point that I think they are doing it on purpose.



[align=justify]39-17-1359. Prohibition at certain meetings — Posting notice. —[/align]
[align=justify](a) 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 otherwise authorized by §§ 39-17-1351 — 39-17-1360, at meetings conducted by,or on property owned, operated, or managed or under the control of the individual, corporation, business entity or government entity. [/align]
[align=justify][/align]
[align=justify]
[/align]

 

[pro2A]

imported post

Maybe it's just me but I thought Tennessee had pre-emption which would prevent the government from banning guns in public buildings...

But then again I'm weird like that.

 

[N6ATF]

imported post

pro2A wrote:

Maybe it's just me but I thought Tennessee had pre-emption which would prevent the government from banning guns in public buildings...

But then again I'm weird like that.

Preemption statutes, like the U.S. Constitution, are just something for the traitor gun banners to print on their toilet paper.

 

[kwikrnu]

imported post

pro2A wrote:

Maybe it's just me but I thought Tennessee had pre-emption which would prevent the government from banning guns in public buildings...

But then again I'm weird like that.

Not really. The laws say they can post to prohibit carry. The law also says if they have a law older than 1986 it may stand.

[align=left][/align]
[align=left]This is from public chapter 428 which passed this summer.[/align]
[align=left]"SECTION 3. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-17-1314, is amended by[/align]
[align=left]deleting the first sentence of subsection (a) and substituting instead the following:[/align]
[align=left]Except as provided in § 39-17-1311(d), which allows counties and[/align]
[align=left]municipalities to prohibit the possession of handguns while within or on a public[/align]
[align=left]park, natural area, historic park, nature trail, campground, forest, greenway,[/align]
[align=left]waterway or other similar public place that is owned or operated by a county, a[/align]
[align=left]municipality or instrumentality thereof, no city, county, or metropolitan[/align]
[align=left]government shall occupy any part of the field of regulation of the transfer,[/align]
[align=left]ownership, possession or transportation of firearms, ammunition or components[/align]
[align=left]of firearms or combinations thereof; provided, that the provisions of this section[/align]
[align=left]shall be prospective only and shall not affect the validity of any ordinance or[/align]
resolution lawfully enacted before April 8, 1986."

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

pro2A wrote:

Maybe it's just me but I thought Tennessee had pre-emption which would prevent the government from banning guns in public buildings...

But then again I'm weird like that.

Not really. The laws say they can post to prohibit carry. The law also says if they have a law older than 1986 it may stand.

So is their law from before 1986 or not?

Yata hey

 

[macville]

imported post

have a law older than 1986 it may stand

So is their law from before 1986 or not?

Yata hey

There's can't be a law for Knox County libraries banning weapons from pre 1986 because the county wasn't incorporated yet. I've been talking with my commissioner about the library ban, but haven't hear anything from him within the past few days. Need to write our lousy county mayor and yap at him for not standing behind the 2d amendment--not to mention that if they actually post correctly (which they have not) all knives are also illegal.

Matthew

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

macville wrote:

have a law older than 1986 it may stand

So is their law from before 1986 or not?

Yata hey

There's can't be a law for Knox County libraries banning weapons from pre 1986 because the county wasn't incorporated yet. I've been talking with my commissioner about the library ban, but haven't hear anything from him within the past few days. Need to write our lousy county mayor and yap at him for not standing behind the 2d amendment--not to mention that if they actually post correctly (which they have not) all knives are also illegal.

Matthew

OK so let's try this one more time.

Tenn. has full state preemption except for laws on the books before 1986 - right?

So how can they ban weapons in the library or anywhere else new without it being done at the state level? Seems illegal/unenforceable to me.

Yata hey

 

[macville]

imported post

Okay, let me see if I can explain this. There is preemption gun law in TN that I am aware of. The first has to do with being able to carry in parks. If a county/city gov had a law again carrying in a park on the books before 1986, that law can still be valid (City of Knoxville had that.) The state Constitution says local govs can not make laws restricting the sale of firearms, restricting carry in places that are not gov owned and are legal via state law (aka, wal-mart, etc.) However!, the law says that local govs can ban locally owned gov property via posting a sign which conforms to 39-17-1359. Therefore, Knox County can ban libraries as it does not fall under preemption since it is gov owned and they are not making a resolution that is against local private property. In fact, a resolution doesn't even have to be passed by the local gov (unless required by their charter), like in this case, the library director just asked the county mayor and he approved it without going to our County Commission.

Does that make sense? It ain't right, but it's legal

Matthew

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

macville wrote:

Okay, let me see if I can explain this. There is preemption gun law in TN that I am aware of. The first has to do with being able to carry in parks. If a county/city gov had a law again carrying in a park on the books before 1986, that law can still be valid (City of Knoxville had that.) The state Constitution says local govs can not make laws restricting the sale of firearms, restricting carry in places that are not gov owned and are legal via state law (aka, wal-mart, etc.) However!, the law says that local govs can ban locally owned gov property via posting a sign which conforms to 39-17-1359. Therefore, Knox County can ban libraries as it does not fall under preemption since it is gov owned and they are not making a resolution that is against local private property. In fact, a resolution doesn't even have to be passed by the local gov (unless required by their charter), like in this case, the library director just asked the county mayor and he approved it without going to our County Commission.

Does that make sense? It ain't right, but it's legal

Matthew

Hell no it doesn't make sense, but I'll trust you on your explanation.

That is not real preemption - that is all warm and fuzzy and makes me itch all over more than any place else. :X

Yata hey

 

[phil1979]

http://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/2015/title-39/chapter-17/part-13/section-39-17-1359/

"(a) (1) Except as provided in § 39-17-1313, 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."

Sorry for the thread necromancy, but since this is still law in Tennessee, and since something was not really pointed out that clearly in this thread yet, I wanted to see if I can make it clear.

Look at the word above that I've bolded and underlined. At first, I too thought this was only about meetings. But the legislature was quite clever here. The use of the word "or" adds a condition unrelated to meetings. If "or" was changed to "and", that would narrow the scope of the law considerably. It would be a move in the right direction.

A better thing for the lawmakers to do, is to simply have genuine state preemption. If local governments want to ban weapons in a room where an official meeting of a government body is taking place, and they have secured with room with metal detectors and armed police, fine. Otherwise, we maintain our carry rights in locally owned public buildings.

Do y'all believe Tennessee has the will to get this done next session? How many have lately written their lawmakers asking them to strengthen state preemption?

 

[solus]

well it is a seven year old necrothread...i am sure your response is timely enough...

ipse

 

[phil1979]

Thank you. I'd say seven years (at least) of this nonsense loophole in state preemption is probably enough infringement on the citizens and visitors to Tennessee. I'd also say next session is high time to get this fixed.

well it is a seven year old necrothread...i am sure your response is timely enough...

ipse

 

[davidmcbeth]

Tennessee's preemption statute would seem to prevent localities from enacting new laws regulating the possession, ownership or transportation of firearms and ammunition. Local ordinances passed before 1986 are grandfathered by the law. But most aspects of licensed handgun carry are regulated exclusively by the state.

Have to ask if there was an ordinance/statute on the books prior to 1986 that would then allow this?

Yata hey

If you were born in 1987 then why should laws passed prior to that date be applicable to such a person? He/she had no say in the bill considered.

 

[Datrebor]

Carry in buisness?

What about OC/CC in a business that posts a sign which does not conforms to 39-17-1359? It just basically says no guns. Other than them asking me to leave is that a crime?