At least, I think that’s what this means.
Category: Legislature
-
It’s crazy that this even has to be considered
Self defense bill would eliminate zero tolerance at schools
NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) –
The state House is voting on a bill that would allow students to fight without punishment if they are confronted at school.The new law would eliminate the notion of zero tolerance and allow students to fight back in self-defense or step in to defend a classmate without fear of punishment.
Ever since Zero Tolerance reared it’s ugly head in the mid 1990s, it’s been the policy of most school systems to suspend kids for getting beaten up. The article has it slightly wrong when it says that today kids can get suspended for fighting back: they actually get suspended even if they don’t fight back.
When I was a junior in high school (1998-ish), I found myself the target of some freshman who thought he could make a name for himself if he beat up an upper classman. In the four years I was at that school, there was ONE fight–and that involved kids from another school showing up in the parking lot. It just wasn’t the kind of school where that thing happened, and this kid saw an opportunity to “run the school” so to speak.
He had started threatening me in front of his friends, so I went to the principal and the proto-school resource officer we had (really just a glorified custodian) and they both told me 1) they couldn’t do anything about it since he hadn’t technically violated any policy and 2) if he threw a punch both of us would be suspended for 2 days, even if I just sat there and took it.
I directly asked both of them something along the lines of “So, the punishment for me is the same if I do nothing versus if I break the guy’s arm?” The answer was yes.
That made it pretty easy for me. It was clear that avoiding punishment was not in my control. There was literally nothing I could to if this kid decided to escalate, so I decided to let him know it was in his best interest to back down.
The next time the kid started puffing up at me, I calmly explained to him that if he initiated a physical confrontation, he would end up in the hospital. I outweighed him by 20 pounds. I was 4 inches taller than him. I had been in martial arts training for 8 years and spent some time on the wrestling team. He said something like “You won’t do that, you don’t want to get in trouble.” I told him about the conversations that I had, and how once the first punch was thrown, both of us were going to get punished no matter the result of the fight.
I never had another problem out of him*.
That’s why this policy is stupid and needs to be addressed. It defies logic that the victim should be punished at all, much less just as harshly as the assailant. If this kid had known up front that he could have had his ass kicked with no repercussions for his “victim” he probably wouldn’t have engaged in the behavior in the first place.
Of course, if your point is to make the populace depend on other people for everything, it makes total sense.
I’ll leave you by quoting the scariest part of the article:
“I don’t think hitting is ever the right answer,” said Kay Dickson, a mother and grandmother. “I think the authorities need to take care of that. I don’t think I ever want to teach my children to hit back. I would want them to go tell someone to help authorities take care of it.”
*After this confrontation, he set his sights on a girl in my class. That girl also happened to be my closest friend, a fact that he found out later. I think he transferred schools after that. Real winner, that one. These days, I’d probably have been charged with assault just for mentioning I could beat the crap out of him with my arm in a sling.
-
But they told me that wouldn’t happen
Headline: Man robs victims at gunpoint in Nashville parks
Lede:
NASHVILLE, Tenn. –
A convicted felon spent Saturday morning robbing people in Cedar Hill and Shelby Parks in Nashville and Madison.In 2009, Tennessee made it legal to carry a concealed weapon in any state or local park, unless the local government that controlled the park proactively re-banned it. Something like 97% of state and local parks are legal to carry in now, but Nashville is one of the places that immediately acted to ban carry permit holders from carrying in Metro Nashville Parks.
So–clearly–the reporter, police, and victims all got it wrong. There is NO WAY that a serious criminal would risk a $500 fine-only misdemeanor by committing at least seven 5-year felonies in a park where he knows his victims are unarmed. Then-councilman Sam Coleman told me so!
-
Parking Lot Bill Passes House
On it’s way to Governor Haslam, who’s not keen on it.
We have a very weak executive office in TN. It takes 60 votes in the house to pass a bill, but only 51 to override a veto. The bill got 72 votes.
It will go into effect July 1st if Haslam doesn’t veto it.
It’s extremely important to note that this bill does not preempt your employee handbook. You can’t be prosecuted for violating a 1359 sign, but you can still be fired.
-
Parking Lot Bill in Civil Justice Committee
Committee started hearing the bill at about 12:05.
Mike Stewart (D-Nashville) apparently doesn’t understand there’s no such thing as a “public business.” He kept going on and on about “but I privately purchased this property. Why would I be affected by this?”
Apparently the bill only applies to the criminal penalties under TCA 39-17-1359. It does NOT protect a carry permit holder from being fired. This is different from the “Employee Safe Commute” bill that we fought for last year, which would have protected the employees from being fired.
Sherry Jones (D-Nashville) was apparently asleep, and asked the same question that was just covered for 10 minutes.
Bill passes out of committee. Goes to Calendar and Rules Committee next week.
-
Rep. Scott DesJarlais Response to Gun Control Efforts
It took a couple weeks to get back to me, but here is the response I got:
February 19, 2013
Dear [redacted],
Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about the potential introduction of gun control legislation. I truly appreciate having the benefit of your views on this important issue.
It is hard to imagine anything more horrifying than the tragic shooting that occurred this past December at Sandy Hook Elementary School. As a parent with three school age children of my own, I join many other concerned parents in recognizing the need to create a safer learning environment in our schools. I believe that it is of the utmost importance for us to enact sensible measures to protect our children. However, I agree with a majority of Tennesseans in expressing my concern that the Obama administration is using this catastrophic event as a way to limit our Second Amendment rights.
President Obama has stated on numerous occasions that he is willing to bypass Congress through the use of executive orders to achieve his gun control objectives. Should the President resort to legislating through executive order, not only would he be circumventing Congress; but ultimately, he would be trivializing the will of the American people and the constitutionally protected democratic process in which they chose to participate.
After the Sandy Hook tragedy, Americans deserve a comprehensive and effective strategy to protect their families from such senseless acts. Unfortunately, the President has chosen to advance a political agenda that in the end will have little impact on stemming gun violence while further eroding the rights of law-abiding citizens. As a proud supporter of our Second Amendment, I am prepared to use any legal means to protect these constitutional rights from infringement. As gun control legislation is introduced into the 113th Congress, rest assured that I intend to oppose any legislative effort that will infringe upon our constitutionally guaranteed rights defined in the Second Amendment.
It is an honor and a privilege representing you and all of Tennessee’s Fourth Congressional District. Please let me know if you have additional comments or question on this or any other legislative matter.
Sincerely,
Scott DesJarlais
Member of CongressCompare that response to what people are getting from Senator Bob Corker.
One is a strong response. The other is not.
-
I have news for Sen. Murphy (D-Conn)
In the print edition of today’s New York Times, the front page above the fold article is this one.
Here is the second paragraph of the article:
“We do know that historically in these instances, amateurs have trouble switching magazines,” Mr. Murphy said, referring to the high-capacity ammunition feeding device used by Mr. Lanza to shoot scores of bullets in seconds. “I believe, and many of the parents there believe, that if Lanza had to switch cartridges nine times versus two times there would likely still be little boys and girls alive in Newtown today.”
Emphasis added. I also stopped reading further. Why?
Because Lanza likely did change magazines nine or more times:
Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter Adam Lanza armed himself with hundreds of bullets on Dec. 14 before he entered the Newtown school.
…
Lanza changed magazines frequently as he fired his way through the first-grade classrooms of Lauren Rousseau and Victoria Soto, sometimes shooting as few as 15 shots from a 30-round magazine, sources said.I have a hard time believing that Murphy doesn’t know that, but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.
Perhaps people should let him know that his basic premise is incorrect. I doubt it will change anything, but at least we can point out that he doesn’t care about the actual facts.
-
What Media Bias?
2013: House not spending enough time debating gun bills*
2009: House spending too much time debating gun bills.
Whatever the House does, it’s wrong.
*The parking lot bill has been introduced every year since at least 2009 and was thoroughly debated last year.
-
Parking Lot Bill to get vote today
It’s not on the agenda, but I suspect it’s being heard in the Criminal Justice Committee at 10:30AM CST.
Here’s the money quote from Gerald McCormick (who we’ve talked about before):
In McCormick’s words: “We can argue about it and then pass it, or we can just pass it.”
I guess he learned his lesson after Maggart was unseated. We’ll see.
UPDATE: This is the bill. It will be heard in the Civil Justice Subcommittee at 3:00PM.
UPDATE 2: Passed to full committee.
-
More Bills Filed in TN
The first wave I listed here
Here is the second wave:
HB 0035 by *Parkinson: As introduced, increases the punishment for a defendant convicted of a crime of violence with a deadly weapon, to receive no less than two times the original sentence imposed upon the defendant.
HB 0036 by *Parkinson: As introduced, declares that any person convicted for the unlawful sale, gift or loan of a firearm to a minor or intoxicated person be punished as criminally responsible for any resulting crime; requires the person serve all the time sentenced without parole.
I’m going to break here and comment on those two. I think Parkinson (D-Memphis) is on track to become my second-favorite Democrat in the TN House. Hardaway is my favorite because of the epic crazy involved in his anti-gun antics. These two bills have no companion bill in the Senate, so they’re not going anywhere (yet). HB0035 is pretty much meaningless since the courts don’t impose any kind of sentence today that acts as a deterrent. HB0036 covers something that is already illegal, but creates a situation where the person who provided the firearm to the kid that robbed a convenience store serves a whole lot more time than the person that actually committed the crime.
These have little chance of becoming law. My only objection to them is that they make something already illegal a little bit illegaler.
SB 0076 by *Campfield:As introduced, limits to 15 the number of handgun carry permit records that can be reproduced in a single day; authorizes receipt of compilation of handgun carry permit records if such compilation will not be published.
SB 0077 by *Campfield: As introduced, allows certain persons employed by a local education agency as a faculty or staff member at a K-12 school to possess and carry a firearm.
Those are Stacey Campfield’s, with no companion in the House. The first one appears to be a compromise version of the bill he’s carried every year to seal Handgun Carry Permit records in order to stop The Commercial Appeal from publishing the database. Again.
The second bill I swear will be called “Guns for Kindergartners” bill by the press, but if you read the text it’s very limiting. The only folks that would be able to carry at schools would be people who work full-time at the school. They would also have to have a carry permit, AND undergo the same training that School Resource Officers go through (40 hours initial, 16 hours annual) AND the school would have to not have a School Resource Officer assigned to it.
Even after all that, the school system can still elect to prohibit carry. However:
Any local education agency that prohibits persons from
possessing and carrying a handgun pursuant to subdivision (f)(2)(A) shall be civilly liable for any damages, personal injury or death that results from a criminal act by any person not authorized to be in the school in which the prohibition was in effect.That’s something I’ve proposed (even to Campfield, personally) for posted properties. This is a step in the right direction, even if the rest of the bill is kinda crappy.
But here is the big one:
HB 0042 by *Carr J: As introduced, prohibits the enforcement and prosecution of certain federal law implemented or executed on or after January 1, 2013, concerning certain firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition.
Read the text of that bill. It has a companion bill in the Senate, so there is some support in the upper chamber. When the summary says “prohibits” it doesn’t mean “provides no funding.” (That’s in HB 0010) It means “makes it a crime for ATF, FBI, DEA, DOJ to try to arrest a Tennessean for violations of a gun control statute.” That’s a pretty big deal. Unlike the Tennessee Firearms Freedom act, this one has teeth. It also requires the state to defend any citizen charged by the Feds.
This one has been all over talk radio. I don’t think it will pass, nor do I think Haslam would sign it, but I’ve been known to be wrong.