Posted: 12/2/2008 3:41:48 PM EDT
|
I've had my CCDW in KY for almost nine years. My little brother had a KY CCDW but he recently moved to TN and wants to get his permit there. From what he has heard from others with TN permits, TN's CCW law is quite restrictive, especially compared to KY.
Is TN really that bad? |
|
like what restrictions have you heard?
no carrying where alcohol is served. no carrying in federal buildings no carrying in state parks also our permit is not a CCW permit it is a HCP (handgun carry permit) we do NOT have to carry concealed. i dont see a problem with tn's carry laws. i just wish we could carry where alcohol is served as long as its not consumed. but that might change. |
|
TN has a reciprocity agreement with KY. Should only be a matter of filling out the paper work.
As far as restrictions; We have a number of restrictions regarding WHERE one can carry. The "safe habor" act as it was touted; was passed the year after the carry bill was passed. This was to ensure that if you used your firearm in a restricted place to defend yourself or another person; you wouldn't be prosecuted for carrying illegally. Unfortunately, a TN permit holder got caught with a concealed firearm on public shool grounds. Apparently there was no imminent danger present and the permit holder was prosecuted. They attempted to use the safe habor statute as a defense and this opened the law for scrutiny by the TN state supreme court. The courts decision essentially invalidated the safe harbor provision. So yes, we are back to being some what restrictive. ( this is my understanding of the case and the courts decision; others may know more regarding the case and may have a little deeper insight) Edit: "safe harbor" otherwise known as 39-17-1322. Defenses–– " A person shall not be charged with or convicted of a violation under this part if the person possessed, displayed or employed a handgun in justifiable self-defense or in justifiable defense of another during the commission od a crime in which that person or the other person defended was a victim" If you carried into a restricted place....you ran the risk of being caught and prosecuted(which is what happened above) but if you used for self defense.....you wouldn't be prosecuted; in theory. The court stated the law was not valid due to the fact it took away the presecutors discretion. |
|
Quoted:
like what restrictions have you heard? no carrying where alcohol is served. no carrying in state parks Those two, plus colleges, any public building, park, concert, sporting event, any any private business where a "no weapons" sign is posted. Those location are all allowed in KY. I expected the usual police station, court houses, federal buildings, schools, etc. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
like what restrictions have you heard? no carrying where alcohol is served. no carrying in state parks Those two, plus colleges, any public building, park, concert, sporting event, any any private business where a "no weapons" sign is posted. Those location are all allowed in KY. I expected the usual police station, court houses, federal buildings, schools, etc. "Any public building" is not correct. Only courtrooms are specifically restricted by statute, though that prohibition in practice is usually extended to the entire courthouse. Municipal or other state/local buildings must adhere to the posting requirements; they're not automatically off limits. David |
|
Quoted:
Is TN really that bad? We're currently in the process of removing the person in the Tennessee legislature who has singlehandedly blocked most of the bills that would have made the state carry law less restrictive on where permit holders can legally carry. Well, not completely remove, but he's being kicked off his throne and put down on the floor where he shouldn't have any more power than any other member of the state legislature. Hopefully, we'll see carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, and carry in state parks, within six months. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Is TN really that bad? We're currently in the process of removing the person in the Tennessee legislature who has singlehandedly blocked most of the bills that would have made the state carry law less restrictive on where permit holders can legally carry. Well, not completely remove, but he's being kicked off his throne and put down on the floor where he shouldn't have any more power than any other member of the state legislature. Hopefully, we'll see carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, and carry in state parks, within six months. Great and congrats on the victory. Who is the a-hole anyway? |
|
Quoted: any private business where a "no weapons" sign is posted. Not exactly. A "no weapons" sign does not comply with the posting requirement in the state law. A private business can announce their prohibition of firearms over a PA, they can walk up to you and verbally notify you of their policy, or they can post the entrances in a manner outlined in the state law. I have yet to see a private business that has gone to the trouble of posting in compliance with the state law, but I usually have no problem with taking my business elsewhere when they post a "no weapons" or "no guns" sign. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
any private business where a "no weapons" sign is posted. Not exactly. A "no weapons" sign does not comply with the posting requirement in the state law. A private business can announce their prohibition of firearms over a PA, they can walk up to you and verbally notify you of their policy, or they can post the entrances in a manner outlined in the state law. I have yet to see a private business that has gone to the trouble of posting in compliance with the state law, but I usually have no problem with taking my business elsewhere when they post a "no weapons" or "no guns" sign. The "post or announce" provision was in the original version of the law, and was removed some years ago, when the specific verbiage & requirements for signs was added. Allowing "announcements" placed the HCP holder in an untenable position: the owner could "announce" his property as gun-free at 2:00AM in a whisper...but who would know? David |
|
Quoted:
TN has a reciprocity agreement with KY. Should only be a matter of filling out the paper work. As far as restrictions; We have a number of restrictions regarding WHERE one can carry. The "safe habor" act as it was touted; was passed the year after the carry bill was passed. This was to ensure that if you used your firearm in a restricted place to defend yourself or another person; you wouldn't be prosecuted for carrying illegally. Unfortunately, a TN permit holder got caught with a concealed firearm on public shool grounds. Apparently there was no imminent danger present and the permit holder was prosecuted. They attempted to use the safe habor statute as a defense and this opened the law for scrutiny by the TN state supreme court. The courts decision essentially invalidated the safe harbor provision. So yes, we are back to being some what restrictive. ( this is my understanding of the case and the courts decision; others may know more regarding the case and may have a little deeper insight) Edit: "safe harbor" otherwise known as 39-17-1322. Defenses–– " A person shall not be charged with or convicted of a violation under this part if the person possessed, displayed or employed a handgun in justifiable self-defense or in justifiable defense of another during the commission od a crime in which that person or the other person defended was a victim" If you carried into a restricted place....you ran the risk of being caught and prosecuted(which is what happened above) but if you used for self defense.....you wouldn't be prosecuted; in theory. The court stated the law was not valid due to the fact it took away the presecutors discretion. Hey Enforcer. Thanks for posting this. I've been trying to find the specifics of this law since taking the carry class. An incident happened in Nashville this fall that might have used this law to get the shooter off. The news site doesn't talk about the safe harbor act. But when I read this portion, I assumed that is why he wasn't charged: "Police also said that Dabbs does not have a handgun carrying permit, but no charges against the homeowner were anticipated." Link to the article So, hopefully it is alive and well in some form. What are your thoughts? |
|
"Police also said that Dabbs does not have a handgun carrying permit, but no charges against the homeowner were anticipated."
Link to the article So, hopefully it is alive and well in some form. What are your thoughts? Could be "safe harbour", and could also be that he was a homeowner on his own property, where a carry permit is not needed. It's pretty clear from the context that he had the weapon in his vehicle, though. Could also be "not charged" with the shooting because it was clearly self-defense. David |
|
Quoted:
Could be "safe harbour", and could also be that he was a homeowner on his own property, where a carry permit is not needed. It's pretty clear from the context that he had the weapon in his vehicle, though. Could also be "not charged" with the shooting because it was clearly self-defense. David We were told in our carry class that the 'home defense' laws only apply inside the house, and once you step outside, you are no longer in your house. In the house, anything goes when an 'unauthorized person has entered the home', but not outside of the home. So, my thought was that the 'safe harbour' law prevented prosecution even though he used the gun outdoors, and illegally since he didn't have a carry permit. Don't get me wrong. I don't want him to be charged, and am happy he wasn't charged. I heard he was cleared from the shooting very quickly. I am glad to live in a state where self defense is taken seriously by the law. I was just trying to understand why he was cleared when not having a carry permit. Long live the Safe Harbour Act! |
|
In TN your vehicle is considered part of your "home", so you do not need a carry permit to keep a firearm in your vehicle or home. The tricky part about your vehicle is that you are also subject to other regulations regarding firearms. TWRA is one in particular. you must obey all hunting regulations regarding loaded firearms while on WMA's or land under the control of the TWRA during hunting seasons. Most TWRA officers are pretty good about this; but it's still something to be mindful of.
Just to let you know I am a NRA certified Handgun instructor; it dosn't make me an expert; but I try to keep up with the state laws regarding firearms and carry permits. Force |
|
Quoted:
In TN your vehicle is considered part of your "home", so you do not need a carry permit to keep a firearm in your vehicle or home. The tricky part about your vehicle is that you are also subject to other regulations regarding firearms. TWRA is one in particular. you must obey all hunting regulations regarding loaded firearms while on WMA's or land under the control of the TWRA during hunting seasons. Most TWRA officers are pretty good about this; but it's still something to be mindful of. Just to let you know I am a NRA certified Handgun instructor; it dosn't make me an expert; but I try to keep up with the state laws regarding firearms and carry permits. Force It's good to have you on board to throw questions at. I was under the impression that you DO have to have a carry permit to carry a loaded gun in an automobile in Tennessee? Otherwise, I thought the gun and ammo had to be separated in the vehicle? I just moved from Colorado a few months ago. In Colorado you can have a loaded firearm in the vehicle (except in some cities). You can also have a firearm in Forest Service land and BLM land, although you aren't allowed to conceal without a permit. So, I am still trying to figure out all the differences here in Tn. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
In TN your vehicle is considered part of your "home", so you do not need a carry permit to keep a firearm in your vehicle or home. The tricky part about your vehicle is that you are also subject to other regulations regarding firearms. TWRA is one in particular. you must obey all hunting regulations regarding loaded firearms while on WMA's or land under the control of the TWRA during hunting seasons. Most TWRA officers are pretty good about this; but it's still something to be mindful of. Just to let you know I am a NRA certified Handgun instructor; it dosn't make me an expert; but I try to keep up with the state laws regarding firearms and carry permits. Force It's good to have you on board to throw questions at. I was under the impression that you DO have to have a carry permit to carry a loaded gun in an automobile in Tennessee? Otherwise, I thought the gun and ammo had to be separated in the vehicle? I just moved from Colorado a few months ago. In Colorado you can have a loaded firearm in the vehicle (except in some cities).same here in TN You can also have a firearm in Forest Service land and BLM landsame in TN, although you aren't allowed to conceal without a permit.different in TN...we are "shall carry" state. Which means you can carry open or concealed...even in downtown Nashville. but you are likely to get some harrassment from some LEO's So, I am still trying to figure out all the differences here in Tn. I responded in red; each state will have some differences; some more than others. Force |
|
Quoted:
I was under the impression that you DO have to have a carry permit to carry a loaded gun in an automobile in Tennessee? Otherwise, I thought the gun and ammo had to be separated in the vehicle? You might get by with a loaded rifle or shotgun in the vehicle in a rural area, but having a loaded firearm where the driver or passengers can reach it (or an unloaded firearm with both the firearm and the ammo within reach) can definitely get you in trouble in urban areas. A former coworker didn't think there would be a problem with having a handgun in the console of his vehicle. Metro Nashville PD stopped him for a traffic violation, the officer asked if he had any weapons in the vehicle, he told the officer about the handgun, and the former coworker had the gun confiscated and had to pay a fine. With a TN carry permit, it's legal to have a loaded handgun in the vehicle, but rifles and shotguns still can't be within reach. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was under the impression that you DO have to have a carry permit to carry a loaded gun in an automobile in Tennessee? Otherwise, I thought the gun and ammo had to be separated in the vehicle? You might get by with a loaded rifle or shotgun in the vehicle in a rural area, but having a loaded firearm where the driver or passengers can reach it (or an unloaded firearm with both the firearm and the ammo within reach) can definitely get you in trouble in urban areas. A former coworker didn't think there would be a problem with having a handgun in the console of his vehicle. Metro Nashville PD stopped him for a traffic violation, the officer asked if he had any weapons in the vehicle, he told the officer about the handgun, and the former coworker had the gun confiscated and had to pay a fine. With a TN carry permit, it's legal to have a loaded handgun in the vehicle, but rifles and shotguns still can't be within reach. you are correct that with a TN carry permit; you are completly legal to carry in your car. HOWEVER! Gov Phil Bredesen signed into law the "Castle Doctrine" in 2007. The new law specifically references 1) any place you can lawfully be 2) your home 3) your VEHICLE. The law is a defense against prosecution when you kill or injur someone who you felt was/is an imminent danger. That law considerably loosened the restriction on the use of deadly force with; ie: guns. Since "vehicle" was specifically referenced; this is beginning to change the interpretation and enforcement many law enforcement officials have regarding TN code 39-17-1308. This code has widely been interpreted that one should have your firearm locked; and ammo stored seperately in your vehicle; because your vehicle was neither a "place of residence; business; or premise of"(the code dosn't mention "vehicle" or even reference it in regard to how firearms could be carried with-in it). It has always been open for interpretation and been subject to enforcement soley on the whim of state; county and municiple prosecutors and LEO's. The new "Castle Doctrine" takes the teeth out of the this bogus interpretation and now makes enforcement a potential violation of both state and federal constitutional rights. Have all prosecutors and LEO's gotten board yet; no! but it's far less likely that you will have a firearm confiscated and be prosecuted for having it loaded and under your seat. The castle doctrine effectively classifies your vehicle as part of your home or your domain. Force |
|
Quoted:
different in TN...we are "shall carry" state. Which means you can carry open or concealed...even in downtown Nashville. but you are likely to get some harrassment from some LEO's Force Interesting discussion all. Regarding the 'carry' nuance of the Tennessee license: I ran into a guy at Academy Sports in Cool Springs a couple of weeks ago that was carrying externally (not concealed). I asked him about it, and asked if he has had any trouble with it. He said in 6 months, only 2 people (me being 1) had ever asked about the holstered weapon. He said he had been in Walmart, many stores, and around the police, and no one had said anything. He told me the only other person that said anything was after the other persons daughter asked the dad out loud why the guy had a gun. The dad said, 'Because it is legal to have a gun in this state if you have a permit'. Good answer. I'm not sure I would want to go there (external carry). But it was an interesting perspective from someone that has been doing so recently. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
With a TN carry permit, it's legal to have a loaded handgun in the vehicle, but rifles and shotguns still can't be within reach. Are you serious? Yes. Several years back, there was a bill to expand the permit to cover weapons other than handguns, but there was another shooting rampage (may have been Columbine?) that got national news coverage, and the bill sponsor withdrew the bill. As I recall, the local news media did make some attempt at mentioning the bill in their coverage of the shooting incident. If there's been another attempt to expand the permit law to cover more than handguns, I must have missed it. But, that's just another reason for TN permit holders to buy/build an AR pistol. 
|
|
Quoted: you are correct that with a TN carry permit; you are completly legal to carry in your car. HOWEVER! Gov Phil Bredesen signed into law the "Castle Doctrine" in 2007. The new law specifically references 1) any place you can lawfully be 2) your home 3) your VEHICLE. The law is a defense against prosecution when you kill or injur someone who you felt was/is an imminent danger. That law considerably loosened the restriction on the use of deadly force with; ie: guns. Since "vehicle" was specifically referenced; this is beginning to change the interpretation and enforcement many law enforcement officials have regarding TN code 39-17-1308. This code has widely been interpreted that one should have your firearm locked; and ammo stored seperately in your vehicle; because your vehicle was neither a "place of residence; business; or premise of"(the code dosn't mention "vehicle" or even reference it in regard to how firearms could be carried with-in it). It has always been open for interpretation and been subject to enforcement soley on the whim of state; county and municiple prosecutors and LEO's. The new "Castle Doctrine" takes the teeth out of the this bogus interpretation and now makes enforcement a potential violation of both state and federal constitutional rights. Have all prosecutors and LEO's gotten board yet; no! but it's far less likely that you will have a firearm confiscated and be prosecuted for having it loaded and under your seat. The castle doctrine effectively classifies your vehicle as part of your home or your domain. Force If I'm following your explanation correctly, your point is that a law that provides protection from prosecution for a self-defense shooting is being used to alter the interpretation of the law concerning prosecution for being armed (while not connected to a self-defense shooting). While this may be happening, that interpretation is still subject to change at the whim of the LEO or prosecutor, and will continue to be so until either new legislation is passed to clarify the issue, or case law is established by the courts. Considering that in the last year or two the Knoxville police department had to give their officers additional training on the state carry permit law, after an officer disarmed, detained, and threatened to fabricate a charge to arrest the permit holder on, when the officer saw that the permit holder was openly carrying (not concealed).. along with the problem of Cheatham county not providing CLEO signoffs for NFA purchases, because a Cheatham county prosecutor decided that suppressors are not legal in TN.. I think anyone who decides to use the Castle Doctrine as justification for having a gun in the car, should be prepared to deal with the potential for being the first 'test case'. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
different in TN...we are "shall carry" state. Which means you can carry open or concealed...even in downtown Nashville. but you are likely to get some harrassment from some LEO's Force Interesting discussion all. Regarding the 'carry' nuance of the Tennessee license: I ran into a guy at Academy Sports in Cool Springs a couple of weeks ago that was carrying externally (not concealed). I asked him about it, and asked if he has had any trouble with it. He said in 6 months, only 2 people (me being 1) had ever asked about the holstered weapon. He said he had been in Walmart, many stores, and around the police, and no one had said anything. He told me the only other person that said anything was after the other persons daughter asked the dad out loud why the guy had a gun. The dad said, 'Because it is legal to have a gun in this state if you have a permit'. Good answer. I'm not sure I would want to go there (external carry). But it was an interesting perspective from someone that has been doing so recently. I've done it a couple of times. my wife usually overlooks it as does 99% of the other people out there. kids are the main ones to notice it first. |
|
If the law has been changed to say that you can carry a gun in your car, then every damn thug inTN will have one and we, the POPO, couldn't do anything about it.
I try to keep up on the law, especially carry laws. Too many things change to quickly to keep up. But as was mentioned earlier, I wouldn't want to be the first person to challenge this. If you have a loaded pistol in your car and the police find it, you will get charged. Until someone up on high comes down and says otherwise. I may ask our city attorney for an AG opinoin on this, it may help all of the good guys. |
|
UPDATE:
TCA 39-11-611 Section D part 3 Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, the person using force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, business, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity This may be what gets you, by having a loaded firearm in your vehicle, you are furthering an unlawful activity. If you are carjacked and shoot the thug, you should be covered. However, if you get stopped and the police find the gun, you are now furthering an illegal activity. It's similar to carrying on school property, if you use the gun to defend yourself you are probably okay, but if it falls out of your pocket, you are cooked. |
|
Quoted:
UPDATE: TCA 39-11-611 Section D part 3 Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, the person using force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, business, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity This may be what gets you, by having a loaded firearm in your vehicle, you are furthering an unlawful activity. If you are carjacked and shoot the thug, you should be covered. However, if you get stopped and the police find the gun, you are now furthering an illegal activity. It's similar to carrying on school property, if you use the gun to defend yourself you are probably okay, but if it falls out of your pocket, you are cooked. As stated earlier it would be an interesting test case; I wouldn't want to be the first regarding a firearm in my car; that's why I have a carry permit. However, In the earlier mentioned article; where the guy was defending himself in his car; I suspect he wasn't charged, due in part, to the "Casle Doctrine" which in turn gives more teeth to the "Defenses" provision. If someone is engageing in unlawful activity ie; theft; armed robbery; assault; illegal drugs; driving while intoxicated etc. where there is a clear violation of law; then you have the obligation( under the provision you just quoted) as a LEO to confiscate the weapon. TCA 39-17-1308; never mentions a vehicle; and has been erroneously interpreted and abused in order to unlawfully confiscate weapons from otherwise law abiding citizens. If you are not a felon and not engaging in illegal activity.....you can't take the gun. We live in a free society and yes.....alot of thugs havn't been caught and convicted of felonies yet. That dosn't give any LEO; the right or power; to confiscate based on some whimsical or fabricated interpretation. Thats why I have mine....so don't take it during a routine traffic stop for a burnt tail light. You violate my federal 2nd ammendment rights; and my state constitutional rights. Edit: after reading this it almost reads as if I was attacking; that is not my intent; I'm speaking in general and don't mean to single any particular person out. And again on this subject....this is my interpretation, and not meant to represent any legal advice. If I were to have a gun confiscated however, this would be my defense; and I believe a very good one. Force |
|
I understand what you are saying, and personally don't think it should be illegal for a law abiding person to have a pistol in their vehicle. And as you say, who wants to be the first to challenge the law. However, if you look under legal defenses for being in posession of a firearm, you will find this....
39-17-1308. Defenses to unlawful possession or carrying of a weapon. — (a) It is a defense to the application of § 39-17-1307 if the possession or carrying was: (1) Of an unloaded rifle, shotgun or handgun not concealed on or about the person and the ammunition for the weapon was not in the immediate vicinity of the person or weapon; (2) By a person authorized to possess or carry a firearm pursuant to § 39-17-1315 or § 39-17-1351; (3) At the person's: (A) Place of residence (B) Place of business; or (C) Premises; The first one is the kicker, it has to be unloaded, if it is on your person or in the vicinity, with no ammunition readily available. As I mentioned earlier, I believe that it should be okay to carry, no law abiding person should need a permit. But I also think that the state will never pass anything like that, they get too much revenue from the permits. What you are looking at are laws that conflict, happens all of the time. It will be interesting to see what happens with it. But because of this conflict, as you have done, it is safer to have a permit. |
|
Can somebody show me where in the Castle Doctrine or any other law it says you can violate State laws and carry a firearm in your vehicle loaded without a permit on a public roadway?
If you are carrying a pistol in your vehicle are on a public road way and it is loaded and you do not have a carry permit, you are violating the law. If you are carrying a shotgun or rifle in your vehicle and it is loaded, I don't care if you have a carry permit, you are violating the law. If you don't believe me, then go out and do so, violate the law, get found to be in possession of a loaded weapon illegally and don't be surprised when you go to jail. Then get your firearms seized from you. Its never about what the law could be, should be, or will be one day; its about what the law is now. I would advise to follow it. |