Since it looks like the only pro gun law we're going to get this year is to be able to have a gun on a boat without a permit, what would you like to see changed as far as carry laws?

I'd like to see the signs not have force of law.

I'd like to see the current crop of anti gun rights establishment RINO's all voted out of office in an historic uprising of the voters.

Screw'em all!

I'd like to see the signs not have force of law either.  

Too bad the pro gun groups do not seem to want to help with that because that is one of the biggest pains.  But I guess I can now keep my rifle in a boat.

PLUS infinity on this one

Has the idea of removing the gun crime behind these stupid signs for carry permits even been floated by the TFA and NRA?  I don't think in the past several years I have ever seen the NRA and TFA get behind a good bill that would do that.

There are already laws that protect business owners, such as trespass laws. Once a business asks you to leave, you have to leave. The gun buster signs are BS and should go away.

By not patronizing those places, you wont go to Autozone park, the Zoo, Beale st, etc. The zoo for example, is a public place partially funded by tax money. I have the right to go there and the right to defend myself.

Trespass does cover private and public property without adding the crime behind the no gun signs.  Has the NRA or the TFA ever seriously approached legislators to make that change because if they have I sure haven't seen it in the past several years.  I think Tennessee is unique in that it is one of the few places where this is a crime for people with permits.  Very strange.

...following this as someone who works on both sides of the state line.  

In Mississippi, the no-guns signs are usually the first question that pops up in a permit class. One sticky part has to do with trespassing. Once you walk past the sign, you are technically trespassing according to the AG. Whether or not there are any charges, depends on whether or not you get caught, how you react to it, how the business owner reacts, and how the police react if they show up.

No legislator so far has wanted to tell a business owner that their property rights are less important than the right to carry.

Another consideration is what happens if you end up shooting someone in self defense while in a place with the sign. The general consensus here is that once you walked past the sign, you were no longer in a place where you had a right to be and therefore fail one part of the justifiable homicide law. So far, I don't know of any cases where that was raised, but according to the state AG's office, it could come into play if the shooting was not a cut and dry situation.

That's my 2 cents. If yall decide to take it on, make sure the justifiable homicide language doesn't conflict with it.