On March 29, 2021, the Tennessee House took up House Bill 786 which is the Governor’s crime package. The bill includes a permitless carry exception for some individuals. It also imposed new conditions on your rights which are not part of existing law. The bill passed the House largely on party lines. It had previously passed the Senate also largely along party lines. It should become law on July 1, 2021.
This is not a true constitutional carry bill. Who says so? Many of the Legislators do. Senate Judiciary Chair Mike Bell, Senator Kerry Reports and even Speaker Cameron Sexton. Speaker Cameron Sexton stated in a radio interview on Tuesday, March 30, 2021, that this is not true constitutional carry but he said that “we will continue pushing and fighting until we can get to true constitutional carry…”
Speaker Sexton’s statement raises very troubling and yet unanswered questions. Who is the “we” and whom are they pushing and fighting? Is it the Governor? Is it other Republicans in the House or Senate? It likely is not the small number of Democrats in the Legislature because the Legislature is totally controlled by a Republican super majority.
Yet, two things appear certain. First, it is not true constitutional carry. Second, there is some individual or group of individuals that are so disproportionately powerful that even Speaker Sexton apparently believes that they can and did block true constitutional carry this year.
Let’s Examine What Has Passed
Real constitutional carry exists when anyone who can legally possess a firearm is able to carry that firearm in most public places without the necessity of a state issued permit. It exists when those who exercise that right can do so on substantially all publicly owned lands, parks, buildings and structures (an exception might be in a prison or within a jail for example).
In contrast, permitless carry laws exist when government “allows” certain classes of citizens to exercise a right and/or when government “allows” the exercise of the right but only within certain limits or conditions. They are typically just the government’s allowance of a limited range of conduct as a defense or an exception to a criminal charge.
The Governor’s bill is full of restrictions. There are restrictions on the age of the individuals who would be “allowed” to carry that excludes some citizens who can legally own firearms including those who are subject to either the militia call or the draft. There are prohibitions on some classes of people who can legally purchase, own or possess firearms. There are restrictions on the kinds of arms that people are “allowed” to carry. There are restrictions on the places where someone is “allowed” to carry.
What did not pass
In light of these restrictions, some House and Senate members proposed amendments and others proposed alternative bills. One of the proposed amendments was ruled by the “Clerk’s office” as “untimely” and was not even discussed. Several other Republicans offered amendments that were not discussed apparently because of a dispute between the legislative staff attorneys who drafted the amendments and the “Clerk’s office” on whether the amendments were in the proper form or scope. Two amendments were discussed and did receive votes.
One was proposed by Republican Chris Todd. This proposed amendment was refiled after the dispute arose between the Clerk’s office and staff attorneys. The amendment would have allowed individuals who relied on the Governor’s bill to carry in the same places, such as public parks, that permit holders are “allowed” to carry. That amendment was rejected by most of the Republicans without addressing the merits.
The second proposed amendment was by Republican Todd Warner. That amendment would have rewritten the bill to allow anyone who could legally possess a firearm to carry it. Republican William Lambert spoke against the amendment because it did not include two classes of misdemeanors (stalking and DUI histories) as factors prohibiting an individual from carrying without a permit whereas the Governor’s bill did include those restrictions. Most Republicans voted against this amendment.
Clearly, several Republicans offered amendments that they felt would bring the Governor’s bill closer to what is required for true constitutional carry. However, there were technical disputes over the form of the amendments or the timing and so they were not considered on the merits. Since this was not the last day of session, the entire bill could have been rolled a few days and the technical disagreements over the amendments could have been addressed. That did not happen. Why there was a rush to pass a bill which does not go into effect until July 1. Would it not have been better for the protection of Tennesseans’ fundamental rights to consider all the amendments and get the best bill, at least in terms of the Second Amendment, rather than to rush forward without considering the concerns of these other Republican legislators?
What can we learn from the vote itself on the partial step toward constitutional carry?
The vote on the Governor’s bill was 64 to 29. It was mainly along party lines with the exception that Democrat John Mark Windle voted for your 2nd Amendment rights and five (5) Republicans voted against it – John Gillespie, Patsy Hazelwood, Eddie Mannis, Mark White and Sam Whitson.
What about the two amendments that did receive votes? On the proposed amendment by Rep. Chris Todd (relative to being able to carry in parks, greenways and other location as if the person had a permit), most Republicans voted with some Democrats to reject even having a discussion on the amendment:
Ayes………………………………………..23
Noes………………………………………..69
Present and not voting……………….1
Representatives voting aye were: Baum, Boyd, Bricken, Campbell S, Chism, Cooper, Doggett, Griffey, Grills, Haston, Hulsey, Hurt, Lamar, Lynn, Moody, Reedy, Rudd, Sexton J, Terry, Thompson, Todd, Warner, Windle — 23.
Representatives voting no were: Alexander, Beck, Calfee, Camper, Carr, Carringer, Casada, Cepicky, Clemmons, Cochran, Crawford, Curcio, Darby, Dixie, Eldridge, Faison, Farmer, Freeman, Gant, Garrett, Gillespie, Hakeem, Halford, Hall, Hardaway, Harris, Hawk, Hazlewood, Helton, Hicks G, Hicks T, Hodges, Holsclaw, Howell, Jernigan, Johnson C, Johnson G, Kumar, Lafferty, Lamberth, Leatherwood, Love, Mannis, Marsh, McKenzie, Miller, Mitchell, Parkinson, Potts, Powell, Powers, Ragan, Ramsey, Rudder, Russell, Shaw, Sherrell, Smith, Sparks, Stewart, Travis, Vaughan, Weaver, White, Whitson, Williams, Wright, Zachary, Mr. Speaker Sexton C — 69.
Representatives present and not voting were: Moon — 1.
The proposed amendment by Rep. Todd Warner which would have expanded the bill to more substantially allow anyone who can legally possess a firearm to carry it failed with most Republicans voting against it:
Ayes………………………………………..15
Noes………………………………………..78
Representatives voting aye were: Bricken, Campbell S, Chism, Cooper, Crawford, Doggett, Griffey, Hakeem, Harris, Lamar, Lynn, Sexton J, Thompson, Warner, Windle — 15.
Representatives voting no were: Alexander, Baum, Beck, Boyd, Calfee, Camper, Carr, Carringer, Casada, Cepicky, Clemmons, Cochran, Curcio, Darby, Dixie, Eldridge, Faison, Farmer, Freeman, Gant, Garrett, Gillespie, Grills, Halford, Hall, Haston, Hawk, Hazlewood, Helton, Hicks G, Hicks T, Hodges, Holsclaw, Howell, Hulsey, Hurt, Jernigan, Johnson C, Johnson G, Kumar, Lafferty, Lamberth, Leatherwood, Littleton, Love, Mannis, Marsh, McKenzie, Miller, Mitchell, Moody, Moon, Parkinson, Potts, Powell, Powers, Ragan, Ramsey, Reedy, Rudd, Rudder, Russell, Shaw, Sherrell, Smith, Sparks, Stewart, Terry, Todd, Travis, Vaughan, Weaver, White, Whitson, Williams, Wright, Zachary, Mr. Speaker Sexton C — 78.
Conclusion
Does the bill allow some people to carry without a permit? Yes. It also puts them at risk for doing so unless they are in places where they are “lawfully present” which may mean that if they carry under this new law in a public park or greenway and are armed that they could be charged with at least two separate criminal acts and have their weapon forfeited.
This is a bill that has drawn national attention. In addition to the Tennessee Firearms Association, at least three national organizations have had a presence in Tennessee working on this issue. TFA and two of the national organizations have consistently called for amendments to the Governor’s bill to make it real constitutional carry and to eliminate the new infringements that it added. They have called for amendments to allow citizens under this bill to carry in the same places that they can carry with handgun permits. TFA and two of these organizations have said that other bills such as HB18/SB318 and HB1388/SB1391 are better bills under the Second Amendment.
One national out-of-state fundraising group did not push with the others. It stood alone and aided in the effort to limit the bill’s scope under the 2nd Amendment by not publicly pushing and fighting, to borrow the Speaker’s words, for true constitutional carry. It gladly compromised to the Governor’s bill.
As Speaker Cameron Sexton has indicated, this law is not true constitutional carry. Chairman Mike Bell, Senator Kerry Roberts, Rep. William Lamberth and others have made similar statements. TFA agrees and we appreciate their willingness to be candid with Tennesseans with that proper characterization of the Governor’s bill.
Speaker Sexton and others acknowledged we have to continue to push and fight to get to true constitutional carry. TFA would appreciate knowing who they think we need to be pushing and fighting against so that perhaps we can either change their minds or remove them as roadblocks.
Sorry, comments are closed for this post.