Now, Bill Lee, the Tennessee Governor, is getting in on the act of rule by kingly decree while also calling for a TN Red Flag law. This is fallacious because TN can already take a person’s gun(s) for mental health reasons. I can’t recall the exact language, perhaps somebody knows, but it, of course, involves harm to self and others, imminent threat or danger, etc.

Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee (R) signed an executive order Tuesday to strengthen the state’s background check process for purchasing firearms and encouraged lawmakers to pass a “red flag” law that would prohibit dangerous people from owning guns, in the wake of a deadly school shooting in Nashville last month—one year after Lee said he would not support tighter gun laws.

Define “dangerous person.” All men are dangerous; some are peaceable, while others are harmless; may the Lord never find you in the latter category.

Key Facts

The executive order requires all crimes to be reported to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation within 72 hours, after which they are “accurately, completely and timely” processed into the state’s background check system.

“all crimes?” Does this mean even misdemeanors and previously nonprohibitive petty crimes? What about folks that have served their time and are now productive citizens and gun owners? Will they be the first to get an early morning SWAT raid?

The state investigative service is also required to examine the state’s process for firearms purchases and submit a report listing any needed changes to both Lee and the state legislature within 60 days.

I’ve always had concerns about Lee since I met him early in his first campaign. I asked him about Constitutional Carry, to which he responded forcefully and without hesitation that he was against it. It was a gut response from which one could immediately know that he firmly believes that only government should have guns. He even went on to say that he would have to consult with the police about that. And so here he is, many years later, consulting with State Police over who should be allowed to have a firearm.

Lee called on the state’s GOP-controlled legislature to pass a “new, strong” order of protection law—also referred to as “red flag” laws—that would prevent people who pose a threat to themself or others from owning firearms.

Now Governor Lee wants 3 a.m. Red Flag raids on people who some antichrist “doctor” will unlawfully warrant. We’re coming to expect more of this “trust the experts” from the inexpert power-hungry profit-motive governments at all levels in the United States.

Is a man with publicly obvious spiritual, mental, and emotional problems that thinks he is a woman a qualifying mental problem? No, by federal law! So who are these Red Flag laws going to target; people who say there are only two sexes, made in the image of God, and all else is sin, a wicked prevision? Transexuals are obviously deviant and socially deficient; any serious Christian would know they have a demon; why are our rights in jeopardy over the influence of the devil in the soul of the godless?

Lee, who said new restrictions would “give the people of Tennessee what they deserve,” indicated last year he would not support restricting firearms or strengthening gun control laws after two previous mass shootings in the state.

Crucial Quote

“We should set aside politics and pride” and take steps to prevent future gun violence, Lee said in a press conference Tuesday at the Midtown Hills police station in Nashville, which responded to the shooting at Covenant School last month.

Lee is governor; every decision he makes is politics. This is also a fallacious argument.

Bill Lee also must be a fake Christian, or he would know better than to infringe on the rights of the law-abiding. A Christian would understand, in his heart, that to accuse his countrymen of the sin of pride over their Biblical duty to protect themselves and their families is False Witness (Exodus 20:16), which is a crime against God. “Thou shalt not kill.” is enjoined. That discussion of self-defense before the throne of God is already over by the Commandment of the Holy One, our true King, not Bill Lee, who is treading dangerously on ground that would usurp God’s sovereignty.

Can evil cast out evil? America has serious spiritual problems due to sin against God. More sin against God by decree of government will not solve this problem. “18 If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub. 19 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out? therefore shall they be your judges.” Luke 11:18-19. Can sin cast out sin, Governor Lee? The solution to the devil is the power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ but so-called Christians don’t believe in the power of the Gospel because they are not actually converted.

What’s offered; more gun control by Republicans! When will America awaken to the falsehood of two competing parties?

And a review of Tennessee’s permitless carry, which Lee signed. It’s NOT permissive but restrictive. The only place it authorizes carry is on private property. That’s not permitless carry, let alone actual Constitutional Carry. Millions of Tennesseans daily carry a firearm, thinking they have a right to carry, but they don’t. The fake NRA sponsored the counterfeit Constitutional Carry bill that was passed in TN.

Source:

Florida gun rights activists will have to settle for, at most, permitless carry this Legislative Session.

I’ve met Representative Russel and heard him speak on other issues as well. The current Tennessee Constitutional Carry is not actual Constitution Carry. But, considering incrementalism TN is on its way. This bill would be very close to what many other states have. In TN open carry of long guns is restricted. This bill would remove that restriction, among others. The way things work in TN, the House Criminal Justice Subcommittee is a critical step in getting legislation to the full House floor.

The best part is when the witnesses all but admit they have no constitutional (TN) authority to oppose gun laws.

Via WoG, Video via TFA; both call for support action from Tennesseans.

Source:

We are in early voting in Tennessee and there are lots of individuals running for governor and the state Legislature.  Many of them, including incumbents, are claiming that a) they are 2nd Amendment supporters and b) that they voted for “constitutional carry”.

Before you vote, know the truth.  The truth is Tennessee has NEVER had real constitutional carry in the last 200+ years and it does not today.

REAL “constitutional carry” means that it is not a crime to carry a firearm for a lawful purpose, such as self-defense.  Nor is it a crime to carry a firearm in most places – including public places – unless the place falls into a very narrow and limited exception.

Tennessee’s laws fail that standard.

First, Tennessee has Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1307(a)(1) which says “A person commits an offense who carries, with the intent to go armed, a firearm or a club.”   That means it is a crime to carry any firearm in Tennessee “with the intent to go armed”.   That law is broad that it is even a crime to carry a firearm with the intent to go armed on your own property, in your own home, or even with a permit.  That is a true statement because Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1308 makes each of those factors “defenses” to the criminal charge.   When something is a “defense” or an “exception” to a criminal charge, the burden is on the citizen to prove to a law enforcement officer or a jury that the individual’s conduct satisfied the elements of the defense.

Now, many police officers would not arrest or charge someone if they clearly could demonstrate the existence of facts supporting the defense – but the officer has the discretion to do so.

Even the 2021 “permitless carry” law, which many have erroneously referred to as constitutional carry” has at least 7 elements or conditions to its application.  Further, it is also written as an “exception” which means that the burden is on the individual to prove that the individual satisfies all of those conditions.

Second, Tennessee also fails the REAL “constitutional carry” standard because of part of what Bill Lee offered and the Legislature passed in 2021 in his “permitless carry” law.   As part of the 2021 law, they added Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1307(g) which is the operative language of the permitless carry law.   However, it does not apply to everyone who can lawfully purchase or possess a firearm.  It only applies to handguns.  It only applies to individuals who can meet the other qualifications under that subsection – such as the age limit qualification and/or the provision that requires that the individual “is in a place where the person is lawfully present.”

Third,  Tennessee fails the REAL “constitutional carry” standard because of another part of what Bill Lee offered and the Legislature passed in 2021 in his “permitless carry” law.   As part of the 2021 law, they added Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1307(h).  At least three subparts of (h) make it a crime for people who can otherwise legally purchase or possess firearms to carry those firearms “with the intent to go armed.”

Fourth, Tennessee fails REAL “constitutional carry” because it has many “prohibited places” statutes that make in crimes to possess firearms in some specific places (e.g., schools or public parks) but also any other place that might be “posted”.   The problem is that the 2nd Amendment never contemplated that these areas would be subject to government regulation.  In fact, the United States Supreme Court just ruled to that effect in June 2022 when it decided the case of New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.  The Supreme Court essentially said if the right to carry or the manner or place of carry was not regulated by a law in 1791 (or in some instances in 1876) then it probably can’t be regulated constitutionally today.

REAL constitutional carry means that it is simply not a crime for someone who can lawfully possess a firearm to carry it for any lawful purpose – including self-defense.   REAL constitutional carry means that unconstitutional geographic and other restrictions on what, when and where you can carry a firearm do not exist.

So, be prepared when these elected officials and candidates start talking about Tennessee and whether it had constitutional carry.  If they can’t get that right, do they need to be in public office to protect your other rights?

News from Indiana.

Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb made Constitutional Carry the law in Indiana on March 21.

This will allow any Indiana resident over 18-years-old who qualifies to carry a handgun on their person without a permit to do so.

Vanderburgh County Sheriff Dave Wedding says that it could make law enforcement’s jobs considerably harder.

“Now, if you have maybe three people who shouldn’t possess a weapon inside of a vehicle, and they get stopped by police and there is a weapon,” said Wedding, “they can have some young person, 18-year-old person in the car and just claim, hey, those are my guns.”

So what?  It’s none of your business.  Mind you own business, nosey.  Issue the traffic citation and move on.

Officials say on July 1 no one in Indiana will be required to have a carry permit.

Good.  Constitutional carry comes to yet another state, and here’s yet another prediction.  There won’t be blood running in the streets and regardless of the predictions of chicken little, the sky won’t fall.

Now.  How about South Carolina?

Florida Politics.

The fliers were funded by the National Association for Gun Rights, which takes a “no-compromise stance when defending our right to keep and bear arms.”

Brannan, a Macclenny Republican, chairs the Criminal Justice & Public Safety Subcommittee. The flier includes a call to action to contact Brannan’s office and demand he slate a “constitutional carry” bill for consideration. Specifically, it seeks an agenda spot for legislation (HB 103) carried by Rep. Anthony Sabatini, a Howey-in-the-Hills Republican.

Sabatini, a lawmaker who regularly feuds with GOP leadership, tweeted the legislation was being blocked by RINO lawmakers …

“RINO Cowards like Chris Sprowls are once again BLOCKING Constitutional Carry!” he tweeted. “When will people wake up and vote these TRASH establishment ‘Republicans’ out?!”

Some members have pointed out there is no Senate companion legislation to Sabatini’s bill, which means the bill could not be passed by the full Legislature anyway.

Still, the gun rights organization would like the legislation considered by at least one chamber this year. If passed, the bill would eliminate any requirements for concealed carry permits in order for Floridians to carry firearms in public.

Until the bad actors are eliminated through primaries, this will continue to happen.  We pushed hard enough in South Carolina and made it such centerpiece legislation (even though I don’t live in S.C.) that they took open carry out of the judiciary committee and put it straight on the floor because the committee was blocking it.

Granted, it takes the majority of the senate to do that, but it can be done.

I really want open carry and constitutional carry for Florida.  I remain disappointed that the governor has not brought this up as an important piece of legislation and thrown his weight behind it.  Another reason, of course, that this is stalling is because LEOs are opposed to it.  Of course.

So far my reaction to DeSantis is … meh.

Dean Weingarten.

The Judiciary Committee was the chosen vehicle used by the Republican majority of senators to kill Constitutional Carry in 2021. The Republican senators had met in caucus and are reported to have used a secret vote to kill Constitutional Carry. They did so with the simple method of never allowing the bill to be debated or voted on in the Judiciary Committee.  The problem for the Republican senators is Constitutional Carry is very popular with their base constituency.

There are 21 states which have Constitutional Carry. It has not been a problem. Homicide rates have not increased. As with all the other reforms which have removed and loosened decades of infringements on the Second Amendment, the “blood in the streets” promised by those who wish to disarm the population, has not materialized.

Dean calls them RINOs.  I don’t use that term.  The two parties are mirror images of one another.

Don’t confuse them with the facts, Dean.  What you said is true.  They’re going after the soccer mom vote, and they know that no one will take the time or make the effort to oust them in the next primary despite what they say.

Tom Knighton writing at Bearing Arms.

However, there are a couple of other bills that, if they pass, will put them squarely at odds with the federal government.

Senate Bill 2 and House Bill 7 would both create the Alabama Second Amendment Preservation Act. This act would prohibit state law enforcement from enforcing any federal law, or other legislation, regarding the regulation of firearms, firearm accessories or ammo.

The bills would also set up penalties for whatever agency violates the proposed bill. The penalty for a first offense is a class C misdemeanor with a fine no less than $500 or more than $5,000. For all other offenses, it is a class B misdemeanor with a fine no less than $1,000 or more than $7,000.

In other words, it’ll be much like Missouri’s law that went into effect earlier this year.

That law hasn’t really been tested in the courts yet, so we don’t know how that will go, so Alabama following suit may or may not be a great move for them.

However, there’s another bill that may cause far more problems.

A different bill, House Bill 13, would prohibit state law enforcement from enforcing any federal bill or other legislation pertaining to the regulation of firearms, firearm accessories or ammo, just like Senate Bill 2. However, this only pertains to those made and sold in Alabama.

Under existing constitution law, Congress is given the authority to regulate interstate commerce. This bill would provide that firearms, ammo and firearm accessories that are made in the state and are only traded within the state are not subject to federal law or regulation.

Now, on the surface, this looks great for Alabama and I happen to agree with the reasoning behind this bill.

That said, Kansas passed a bill like this a while back. There are now people in prison because they figured the law would protect them, but the courts disagreed.

Alabama is free to pass the bill, of course, but if you live there and think that once it does, you can go out and build yourself a machinegun, well, I have some very bad news for you.

It should be noted that the prosecutions in Kansas have been upheld by the courts, so there’s no reason to believe Alabama residents would have any better luck.

Frankly, this is a bill that probably shouldn’t be passed. Yes, it’s pro-gun and yes, I agree with the reasoning and thinking behind it. However, there are people who will think this gives them license to do things that it really can’t. It’ll hurt good, decent people who simply don’t realize they’re doing anything wrong.

That doesn’t benefit anyone, I’m afraid, so it’s probably for the best if this doesn’t actually get passed.

I think Tom gets this wrong on every account, and this certainly isn’t the first or twentieth time I’ve disagreed with the folks at Bearing Arms, and it won’t be the last.

To begin with, yes Alabama should pass both of these bills and they should be signed by the governor.  First and foremost should be the constitutional carry bill, but if they get this far, they should pass the balance of the pro-2A bills as well.

But then Kansas passed such a law and people are in jail because of it, right?  Well, not so fast.  We covered it.  Kansas passed a 2A sanctuary law and I covered it.  It was more of a nullification law, and had the express purpose of allowing the purchase of NFA items without seeking approval of the controllers inside the beltway.  I said at the time that unless the governor was willing to send state and county police to arrest and imprison FedGov agents who attempted to make arrests in Kansas for said actions, it was weak tea and not really a nullification law.  Even the sponsor of the bill said that it mostly symbolic.

The Alabama bill seems a bit different, focusing on whether agents of the state can participate with FedGov agents in making such arrests.  They are taking incremental steps.  Some state is eventually going to have to broach this issue sooner or later, but until a governor is willing to battle FedGov agents, we’re left with what we’ve got.

I see the last sentence of the paragraph … “This bill would provide that firearms, ammo and firearm accessories that are made in the state and are only traded within the state are not subject to federal law or regulation” … is the tricky part.  I wouldn’t test that part of the bill, if indeed it has that proviso.  As for prohibiting agents of the state from aiding the enforcement of any new federal laws, Alabama can certainly do that, and Missouri has thus far been quite successful thus far in preventing cooperation with the FedGov, which is a good thing.  Finally, if this portends to be a weak nullification law, I see it as possibly targeting FedGov control over things like semi-automatics and AR-15s as anything else.

As for the Missouri law not being tested in court, I seriously doubt that the word of a federal court will stand as the law if the governor of the state makes it clear that the state law will be enforced, and that agents of the state who aid the FedGov will indeed lose their ability to work in law enforcement ever again.

That’s the whole point.  There are certain things a state can do regardless of what a federal court says.  This is one of them.

Alabama should pass both bills, but only after focusing first on a constitutional carry bill.

Florida.

Some top Florida Republican lawmakers have now said they would support constitutional carry legislation in the upcoming session.

The policy would allow all legal gun owners to carry firearms without a concealed weapons license.

The constitutional carry legislation was filed by the Legislature’s most outspoken conservative member, Rep. Anthony Sabatini.

“Our very liberal Republican Speaker Chris Sprowls has gotten tens of thousands of emails from gun groups,” said Sabatini.

The policy is split into two bills.

The first would allow gun owners to carry concealed weapons without a license.

“You don’t have to go ask the government for permission,” said Sabatini.

The second would allow for open carry.

Please tell me that open carry will pass, and that I don’t have to watch any more idiotic police antics with cops showing their ass to everybody when guys open carry while fishing?  Please?

Alabama.

Remember Sheriff Sam Cochran (aka, Boss Hogg) who literally fired Stringer for having different political views?  Yes, that Boss Hogg.

To the folks in Mobile County.  Please tell me you’re going to find a way to get rid of that tyrannical goober you have for Sheriff.  Please?

News from Tennessee.

Is anyone surprised that those who risk financial loss (instructors for state-required classes) are opposed to this bill?