If the dollar has little value, then donate a few.

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Guns in parking lots/trunks

The guns in parking lots/trunks bill may come back next year.

Yes. I may carry it, but the question from me will be more one about how the process will move forward. As I have said publicly, I thought the way things went down last year was bad. What could have been a worked out bill turned into a "Who has the bigger.....stick" contest.

In the end, nothing passed.

Instead of it being about the legislation it became more about personalities. Legislators were mad at the gun advocates (A traditional friend) and gun advocates got mad at legislators (people who are traditionally on their side).

While there was a electoral blood letting I still think for this bill to move forward it will require tempers to come back down to earth and both sides will need to be willing to find ways to make something work.


  1. Please get Gus out of the trunk before he shoots himself with the guns stored in the trunk :p

  2. The fact that this is being debated shows that our society doesn't have a good understanding of what fundamental rights are. This is a violation of private property rights. What's next? Are you going to pass a law telling me that the traveling salesman can have a gun in his car when he comes onto my property because there might be a robber at my house?

    Be careful about carrying this bill Stacey. If you compromise one bit on it, the gun loons may be calling for your political head in 2014. Instead try finding a House sponsor for the Constitutional carry bill that you sponsored last session. That was a much better bill than violating private property rights.

    1. Tona, thanks so much for calming down your language on the posts you leave here!

      Now I can read your comments and learn from you!

      I, too, want Stacey to be safe in all this "guns in parking lots" controversy. What an emotionally charged issue this one is!

  3. While I cannot argue your take on it, Senator, the fact is also that some pseudo-conservative Republicans refused to dance with the ones who brung them. These hypocrites abandoned representation of their constituents in favor of big business in Tennessee and left us, the common people, burned and bruised.

    Well, the head of that snake was targeted and defeated in the primary. Hopefully, this will serve as a wake-up call to your colleagues who are less pro-gun than yourself that we will not tolerate such behavior.

    Again, the ballot box is the best box to get rid of what ails you.

  4. Tona - should an employer be allowed to forbid your car to come onto their property if you have a bumper sticker on it that they do not agree with?

    1. Yes, an employer has the right to tell you to shave, cover your tattoos, what to wear, to cover your bumper stickers etc. When you're on the clock and on their property, respect it. If you don't like their rules find another job.

  5. Tona - an even better comparison would be the following - should an employer be allowed to ban your car for having a magazine in the trunk that they do not agree with even though they have never seen said magazine only heard that you had it there?

    1. An employer should be able to make any rules he wants, so long as he doesn't steal from you or physically harm you. If you don't like it, you are free to get another job.

    2. Jim,

      Only if you have your state-issued bumpersticker/magazine carry permit, submit to fingerprinting, background check, a magazine reading/bumpersticker application class and pay a perpetual tax to enjoy your 1st Amendment "right". Then we would be consistent with the 2nd :o).

      If it is private property, the property owner can dictate what happens there. I am not forced to work for a particular employer or ship my packages with FedEx, buy Volkswagens or shop at an anti-gun retailer or restaurant or sell insurance to Tona. I can choose more gun-friendly businesses/employers or choose not to travel at all if I deem a trip too dangerous to forfeit my right to bear arms. Of course, the problem would still exist on traveling the public roads without the same infringements. I can only legally choose to stay home or submit to the unconstitutional permit/tax or be unarmed. The state cannot afford to admit your car is your castle, for they are guilty in this regard already. The state already regulates your "private property" and your "right to bear arms" in your car.

      There is no "balance" of these property rights vs. self defense as claimed by some Republicans. If the government were not already regulating these private properties with parking/lighting/zoning/energy efficiency/plumbing fixture count/ad nauseum and calling them (open to the)"public", there wouldn't be the temptation to monkey with them even more or believe they have authority to remove more rights from the property owner or transfer them to/from others. Of course, they will not have the will to hold these (open to the)"public" regulated properties liable for any injury after they have disarmed everyone (except the criminal) "with a view toward safety".

      I have a right to keep and bear arms (that is currently infringed upon in TN). I don't have a right to work at company X or shop at retailer Y. We should love our neighbors as we love ourselves. They should have the right to refuse service...and the wisdom to see assuming all of their customers are armed killers isn't reasonable. Why should the state tell them who can/can't be on their property (or your property)? All liberty comes with risk. Removing the liberty doesn't eliminate the risk.

      I second the motion on the Constitutional Carry bill.

  6. If requiring a business to recognize individual rights somehow violates their private property rights - how do we require businesses to provide wheelchair ramps and handicapped parking?

    Scott B.


Here are the rules for comments. Know them. Live them.