As expected, Governor Bredesen vetoed SB3012.
So what happens now?
Well, last night I got to speak with Senator Doug Jackson about that. The timeline basically will go like this: On Monday, he’ll make a motion on the Senate Floor that will allow them to vote on the veto override. Once that passes, it has to sit for at least 24 hours before they can vote on it. The next Senate floor session after that vote will be Wednesday, May 26th. After the veto override passes, it gets sent to the House. Sen. Jackson indicated that the House does, in fact, have the time to do the override.
This bill will become law, effective July 1st. They just have to go through the motions on the override.
We also talked about the signage amendment, why it was added, and what it means. Basically, the original bill cleaned up the 1359 signage requirement by removing the “substantially similar to” phrasing. Here’s where it gets tricky.
Apparently, back in 2000 when the 1359 language was last updated, some lawyers for the state decided that posting the circle/slash symbol was all that was needed for posting on state buildings. In their world, that is “substantially similar to” the giant paragraph of text we are used to looking for. So the people that run one of the state buildings downtown pulled down their old signs and put up the symbol only.
Now, we can go back and forth about how that was a ridiculous reading of the law, and how the state shouldn’t hire lawyers who found their JDs in a crackerjack box, but that wouldn’t do us any good. See, by clarifying the 1359 language to say “your sign must say exactly this” it means that there is no possible interpretation that the symbol was a valid sign.
So that building would have to replace it’s sign. And that would cost money. Which would mean a fiscal note. Which would kill the bill.
I don’t like it, but that’s the way it is. Of course, as a side effect Randy Rayburn’s stupid “No guns ever, free parking always” sign will be legally binding as of July 1 as soon as the veto is overridden by the House, and it will be a B an A misdemeanor if you’re caught carrying there or any other place with the symbol. If you ever do it again, it’ll be an A misdemeanor with 48hrs in jail and you’ll lose your permit for a year. If you’re in a posted property that has also serves alcohol, you’ll lose your permit for THREE YEARS.
This needs to spread like wildfire through the carry permit community since it has such potential to wreck your life. Make sure all your friends know about this little tidbit.
(On a slighty more cheerful note, expect a Vermont-Style carry bill next session)
UPDATE: In comments, fallguy points out that the bill as amended by amendment #1 goes into effect on becoming law, and that the second-offense provision was removed. In amendment #2, though, they up the first-time offense to an A misdemeanor at any posted property, plus a 3 year loss of your permit if that place serves alcohol. Then, amendment #3 goes and changes the signage requirements again if you post a sign instead of just the symbol. According to the votes page, all three of these amendments passed. I’ve updated the post to reflect the changes.
[...] Restaurant Carry 2.0-What Happens Now? [...]
We went through something similar with sign language here in Texas. As a result we have 30.06 signs. In a wonderful twist of irony Penal Code 30.06 is the section that says the sign must say this exactly “blah blah blah” in English and Spanish in block letters at least 1″ tall and contrasting colors and must be posted at each entrance to be valid. The NO Glocks signs (circle slash) have no legal authority or meaning round these parts any more other than the owner doesn’t like Glocks or sometimes revolvers.
Amusingly, the sign that the State of Arizona came up with for restaurants to post has a picture of a highly-customized, compensated 1911 on it. It cracks me up every time I see it. I’ll be sure not to take my race gun into your restaurant, sirs.
If your state does it right, like Texas did, you can walk right past the 30.06 signs because they are not explicitly compliant with the signage regs. of course, I’m not suggesting that…
[...] Looks like the Governor of Tennessee has really been running from his campaign promises, since he once again has vetoed restaurant carry. Linoge talked to State Senator Doug Jackson to find out what happens from here. [...]
don’t wanna derail the TN thread but TX DPS will tell you there’s no penalty for a non compliant sign and ANY sign constitutes the ‘owner’s wishes’ and can be construed as equivalent to a verbal ‘please leave the premises’ which makes you a trespasser. It doesn’t appear in print anywhere that I know of, but that’s the info they put out during the carry conceal class and my call to DPS got the same answer.
@SayUncle » Restaurant Carry –
I believe the law takes effect immediately after the veto is overridden, not July 1st. (See Section 7 of the 1st amendment)
Also I can’t find anywhere that is says a second violation of 39-17-1359 is a Class A misdemeanor.
All that being said, I really like the bill in that it repeals 39-17-1305, but agree that over all it has made the posting law 39-17-1359 worse..and maybe even more confusing.
It is a shame that the threat of a fiscal note can keep good laws from being passed.
Of course, all this raises the somewhat amusing hypocrisy on the part of the lawmakers in Nashville – after all, if they are comfortable with law-abiding, background-checked, trained, and licensed individuals carrying in restaurants and nearly everywhere else, why not also office buildings that just happened to be owned by the state?
Yeah. I got their “fiscal note” right here.
*sigh* I fear this bill will prove to be one step forward and two back – sure, now we can carry in establishments that serve alcohol (or will be able to as soon as this is overridden), but now all it takes is some half-assed, hand-drawn doodle of a gun with a slash through it to turn otherwise law-abiding individuals into small-time criminals. Yeah. ‘Cause that makes sense.