Posted on 04/05/2021 6:07:19 AM PDT by marktwain
Tennessee is on the brink of passing a strong Constitutional Carry bill. HB0786 originally relied on the requirements needed for an advanced carry permit in Tennessee.
The requirement made the bill somewhat unclear. The Tennessee Senate amended the bill to change the “advanced carry permit” section to a requirement the person be 21 years of age or more, with exceptions for people who served in the military. The bill passed the Senate on 18 March 2021.
The bill amends Tennessee Code 39-17-1307 by adding section (g).
The House amendment needs to be affirmed by the Senate, before being sent to Governor Lee. It seems a done deal. The celebrations should wait until the bill is signed into law.
Here is the language of the Constitutional Carry bill SB0765. From capitol.tn.gov:
by deleting the amendatory language of Section 1 and substituting instead the following:
(g) It is an exception to the application of subsection (a) that a person is carrying, whether openly or concealed, a handgun and:
(1)
(A) The person is at least twenty-one (21) years of age; or
(B) The person is at least eighteen (18) years of age and:
(i) Is an honorably discharged or retired veteran of the United States armed forces;
(ii) Is an honorably discharged member of the army national guard, the army reserve, the navy reserve, the marine corps reserve, the air national guard, the air force reserve, or the coast guard reserve, who has successfully completed a basic training program; or
(iii) Is a member of the United States armed forces on active duty status or is a current member of the army national guard, the army reserve, the navy reserve, the marine corps reserve,
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
19 states, 31 to go.
Nope.
Iowa made it 19, last week. When Tennessee passes Constitutional Carry, it will be 20.
(Indiana will make it 21.)
Iowa and Tennessee both show a lot of class coming from classy people..........
“Iowa and Tennessee both show a lot of class coming from classy people...”
Thank you, Sir.
Yes! Yes. Yes. We need these state laws to protect our federal constitutional rights to keep and bear arms without governmental infringement
While CC is GREAT! It is misnamed! All the exceptions make it so.
“...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Who’s “right”? “the people”. Does it say citizen? Does it say “adult”? Are there “ANY” restrictions?
NO! NO! and NO!
Is it a “right” given to us by the framers? NO!
It is the “right” to be able to protect oneself and family given to us “BY GOD!”
The constitution merely states that a God given right “shall not be infringed”.
While CC laws are GREAT, they should be called Constitutional carry BUT laws.
Until I can walk into a store or order on line (without jumping through ANY hoops, filling out any paperwork, or meeting ANY qualifications) a 9mm or AR-15 plus ammo and walk down main street USA “carrying” my weapons, we don’t have the constitutional carry that God or the founders/framers intended.
While I’ll accept most (if not all) constitutional carry
laws, let’s not call them what they AREN’T.
For clarity purposes... Do I think violent criminals, clinically insane people, toddlers, should have guns? Of course NOT!
Should people be allowed to have full auto weapons, rocket launchers, or tanks? I’ll have to get back to you on that.
I really don’t understand this change. I know of no one who has retired from the military at the age of 18. Military retirement usually requires 20 years of service. Evidently the Tenn NG is signing up members before their conception.
If you were honorably discharged, not retired.
Lazy reporting
A right that 9 people in black robes can nullify with a single stroke of their pens. I am so glad Trump was able to put 3 people on SCOTUS who are not flat out commie libs, like a president Hilary Clinton would have done. Imagine if Hitlery had added 3 more like Fagan and Sortamywhore.
Many thousands of enthusiasts already own full auto weapons, rocket launchers, and tanks, as well as cannon, crew served weapons, and even jet fighter aircraft. So far as I know, not a single one of these enthusiast have ever commited a crime with any of this battlefield hardware.
Other than that, I believe ex-convicts should be able to own guns, without any special restrictions that the rest of us are not subject to. I never felt a man should forfeit his capacity for self defense just because he went to prison. The first thing he is going to do when he is free is to illegally obtain an illegal firearm, and presto! he is forced to commit a new felony. All the law does is cause him to commit another crime, straight out of prison. It doesn’t stop one ex-con from having a gun. They are all going to get them illegally.
Disclaimer: I am not an ex-con nor have ever been arrested, so I have no dog in the hunt.
I think it’s a joke that folks would carry open like the wild west. I live in Texas and yep we can do that here. The problem I think is too many think they are too big cowboys. I live outside a small and greatly growing town here in Texas, but the one day I stopped at Valero and saw a young 1 or 2 child in a car seat with the truck running and asked his Dad as I stood behind him in line, “what would you do if someone stole your truck right now?” He said, “that’s what I got this for.”
yes, at least PDJT’s appointees don’t (so far, anyway) sound like Stalin or Hitler on the bench
redgolum wrote: “If you were honorably discharged, not retired. Lazy reporting”
The actual text of the bill is:
“(B) The person is at least eighteen (18) years of age and:”
“(i) Is an honorably discharged or retired veteran of the United States armed forces;”
So, the bill does cover those between the ages of 18 and 21 who are retired veterans. Poor bill writing.
I stand corrected.
I bet on lazy reporting, which is typically a very safe bet, instead of poor law design.
redgolum wrote: “I bet on lazy reporting, which is typically a very safe bet, instead of poor law design.”
Probably 99.9999% of the time, you would have been correct.
I saw a study in the WSJ about 10 years ago comparing the rigor of various college degree programs and the quality of the students in those degree programs. Journalism ranked 2nd from the bottom. Unfortunately, education was the bottom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.