So You Want To Be A Waiter

The best book on waiting tables that you have never read – yet

Court challenge to Tennessee allowing guns in alcohol-serving establishments

First of all, I’m against concealed carry permit holders bringing their weapons into my restaurant or any other restaurant. Alcohol and guns don’t mix well. And I’ve heard all of the arguments.

Basically, the law states that a permit holder can bring a weapon into an establishment that serves alcohol but can’t drink while carrying.  The article that I’m linking to implies that Tennessee might be the only state out of the 37 states that allow concealed-carry permits to specifically allow guns in bars and restaurants (27 forbid it outright). Tennessee has also recently passed a law that allows guns to be toted in public parks as well, which seems rather insane to me. Governor Bredesen vetoed the guns in restaurants bill but it was overriddenby the Senate. Bredesen was resigned to signing the second guns in parks bill doe to the political realities currently in the Legislature.

Fortunately, opponents to the bill in the state legislature demanded an opt-out clause to both pieces of legislation. Municipalities are now free to pass local ordinances banning weapons in public parks (Davidson,home to Nashville and neighboring Williamson County and Shelby county, home of Memphis) are among the first to rush to beat the Sep. 1st  start of the new state law.

Furthermore, many restaurant owners are now posting “No Guns Allowed” on their front doors, including Randy Rayburn, one of the leaders in the fight to have the new guns in restaurant law declared a “public nuisance”. Rayburn, owner of venerable Sunset Grill, Midtown Cafe, and newish hot spot Cabana is willing to risk the wrath of the gun lobby and the more rabid elements of the gun ownership population. He fears that public safety will be compromised, employer liability increased, and tourism possibly hurt. Even the police seem queasy about the possibilities inherent in allow guns and alcohol to mix.

Here’s one article about the challenge to the law.

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/guns-bars-face-local-legal-challenge

BTW, I was a .50cal gunner and Track Commander in my Mechanized Infantry platoon, so I’m pretty well-schooled and familiar with guns of all types.  I qualified not only “Expert” with the M-16 and M-60, I was also “Sharpshooter” with a Colt .45 (just didn’t have much need to get “Expert” with that one since I didn’t carry one like my hot-shot 2nd Lt. did). 

And now, a gratuitous and obviously staged shot of a gunshot victim being helped by a manaical Clive Owen (I decided that a real picture of a gunshot victim would be too graphic.

CliveOwenSPLASH_450x450

8 responses to “Court challenge to Tennessee allowing guns in alcohol-serving establishments

  1. Pingback: Blog Article and Video about  Court challenge to Tennessee allowing guns in alcohol-serving … - Clive Owen

  2. Chris Hoffman July 27, 2009 at 2:37 am

    Take a deep breath, folks. Nationwide, licensed concealed carry is coming, and it’s going to be OK, really it will, even at TGIF;s. The sky will not fall, nor will the old West reappear, and blood will not run in our streets. We don’t have to guess about the outcome. There are 40 states that already have mandatory issue for CCW licenses, and there are 8 more states that have discretionary licensing. Together, 48 States have demonstrated in the last decade that licensed, concealed carry works, that public safety and security is enhanced, and that as a public policy, it measurably suppresses violent crime.

    Americans have demonstrated once again that we can be trusted with our own safety and security. And that we can and must be trusted with our liberty.

    • teleburst July 27, 2009 at 6:41 am

      Well, first of all, blood is already running in the streets, especially if you were in the streets of a certain area in Alabama earlier this year (heck, all you had to do was be on your porch).

      CCW advocates *used* to say that there had been no murders committed by permit holders and used that as “proof” that it was a safe policy. Can’t use that one any more, as just here in Tennessee, there have been at three murders this year alone that I know of, one of which happened after a night of drinking by a 21 year old kid who, by all accounts was a “loving kid” (I actually know his aunt). One was in a parking lot over a parking space. There have been at least 3 murderous shooting sprees by CCW permit holders this year in the country. The statistics will only rise as more people take advantage of this “freedom and liberty”.

      But my real objection here is allowing guns and alcohol to mix. I think it’s absolutely insane. Of the statistics that you quoted, only Tennessee, out of the 50 states, is specifically allowing guns to be carried into places that serve alcohol. 27 states prohibit it, which I personally think is the way to go.

      Fortunately the Legislature here was forced to add an opt-out clause. However, they did it backwards. Instead of allowing restaurants to post that guns were allowed, they require restaurants to post that guns *aren’t* allowed. This indicates to me that “public safety” wasn’t an interest here. They were trying to push the envelope of gun carry laws.

      Turns out that as many as 75% of restaurants and bars might very well opt-out (although I think the figure will be lower when the time comes to post those notices). Plus, it’s being challenged in court, so they might have just bitten off more than they can chew.

      Thanks for weighing in!

  3. Chris Hoffman July 27, 2009 at 11:46 am

    “But my real objection here is allowing guns and alcohol to mix.”

    There is no ALLOWING guns and alcohol to mix. The measure specifically prohibits drinking while armed. Anyone willing to break that part of the law would disregard carry laws as well, and would just as willingly carry without a license.

    ” . . . well, first of all, blood is already running in the streets, especially if you were in the streets of a certain area in Alabama earlier this year (heck, all you had to do was be on your porch . . .”

    You seem to be suggesting that CCW licensees went on a kind of a bloodthirsty rampage. Whatever incident you mat be referring to, I’m pretty sure it involves illegal and immoral behavior for which no licenses are issued. Someone willing and capable of harming an innocent human being will have even less regard for a carry restriction, and will therefore be armed anywhere and in any state of intoxication that they wish. This law is about responsible folks, who do NOT drink, retaining the ability to defend themselves and their families from the miscreants to whom you refer.

  4. teleburst July 27, 2009 at 1:15 pm

    No, I’m not suggesting it – it happened. You seem to be suggesting that licence holders aren’t capable of “immoral and illegal behavior”. Unfortunately, that’s not true. Just ask those 10 dead folks down in Alabama, or the dead model in Memphis who was killed by a 21 year old with no prior record. And, guess what? If CCW carriers are willing to go on rampages or kill others, what’s going to stop them from drinking while carrying?

    The “miscreants” that I refer to are CCW permit holders, so I’m not sure how you make the distinction between good ones and bad ones. Better not to light a match to a powderkeg in the first place by mixing alcohol and guns. And that’s my opinion.

    BTW, the 21 year old who shot the model in the head left his weapon in the car, so he at least was capable of making the distinction at the time of not breaking the law at the time as it referred to permit holders. He only broke the law an hour later when he pulled the pistol from his truck’s glove box and shot the model in the head in her own living room. As far as I know, he hadn’t had so much as a parking ticket.

  5. Chris Hoffman July 27, 2009 at 5:19 pm

    The story is heartbreaking, of course. Since we all agree the goal is to save and protect innocent life, it’s important that we don’t look at the smaller part of the picture and think we can draw meaningful conclusions about what promotes public safety and security.

    I am not suggesting that concealed licence holders aren’t capable of “immoral and illegal behavior”. I’m only pointing out that taken a group, they are the most law abiding subset of our population to be found anywhere; that they deter exponentially more crimes than they cause, and that they demonstrably and measurably suppress violent crime to a significant extent with their presence in society.

    We don’t have to guess about this. 40 states now have shall-issue CCW licensing for those not disqualified from gun ownership (i.e. felons, domestic abusers, the mentally ill and drug addicts).

    In every single state that has implemented ‘mandatory issue’, violent crime, including murder, rape, and robbery have all plummeted. Those aren’t imaginary statistics, and they translate into tens of thousands of violent crimes that were averted, rapes prevented, robberies discouraged, and lives saved.

    Those capable of immoral and illegal behavior with firearms are demonstrating egregious behavior so far and above that of any carry law, as to make a mere firearms violation irrelevant to them. CCW licenses are annually revoked at a rate lower than the termination of police officers for criminal offenses. No criminal capable of murder will has the slightest consideration or respect for a mere gun law. Nope, there’s only one effective deterrent to someone with a mind bent on evil, and it’s not the police, only because they can’t be everywhere, but you and I can take responsibility for our own safety and that of our families.

    ” . . .The “miscreants” that I refer to are CCW permit holders, so I’m not sure how you make the distinction between good ones and bad ones. . . ”

    Easy. They comprise the entire group of licensees, except the 2/10th of a single percent that have had their licenses revoked for any reason, usually a temporary restraining order related to domestic abuse. If the entire country obeyed the law at that same rate, we would think we were in Switzerland.

  6. teleburst July 27, 2009 at 8:55 pm

    And I’ll give you the last word.

    Thanks for the non-confrontational discussion. It was refreshing.

  7. Chris Hoffman July 27, 2009 at 10:41 pm

    Namaste

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: