On March 2, 2021, the Tennessee Senate Judiciary Committee considered SB765 by Senator Jack Johnson (House version is HB786 by Rep. William Lamberth) which bill is commonly referred to as the “Governor’s Bill”. This bill is primarily a massive $17 million dollar per year crime package but it does contain a section that addresses permitless carry in Tennessee.
With almost no debate and minimal discussion, the Senate Judiciary passed SB765 and sent it to the Senate Finance Committee. The vote on the bill, as expected, was on party lines with all 7 Republicans voting for the bill (including three with long histories of frequently opposing or killing 2nd Amendment legislation) and the two Democrats voting against it.
Although there is an amendment on the bill to the permitless carry portion, that amendment is not available on the state’s website for public to read, understand or even be able to discuss with their elected officials or committee members. The amendment has been obtained by TFA and can be downloaded from the files linked at the bottom of this post.
It is significant to note that despite all the phone calls from TFA members to committee members and Senators, not a single amendment was offered to put REAL Constitutional Carry in this bill. We define REAL Constitutional Carry as a) any person who can legally posses b) a firearm can c) carry the firearm without the need of a permit. In addition, REAL Constitutional Carry means EFFECTIVE Constitutional Carry. That means that “gun free zones” particularly on publicly owned buildings and properties, including parks, greenways, etc., must be eliminated.
As expected, the Tennessee Sheriffs’ Association and others in law enforcement spoke against the bill. They lauded the existing permit system (which they all opposed when it was enacted) and claimed that Tennessee needed to retain or create processes and procedures so that they could essentially “shake down” a citizen whom they believed had a handgun to determine if the person could legally possess it by doing citizen detentions in order to do on the spot background checks. See testimony of Sheriff Jeff Bledsoe at approximately 2 hours 59 minutes in the video testimony.
The NRA’s lobbyist, a former Bill Lee staffer, also testified (see 3 hours, 21 minutes). He made a point of thanking Governor Lee, Senate Leadership and others for including the NRA in the process. He claimed that the NRA has led on “constitutional carry” across the nation.
Sen. Mike Bell then recognized Logan Hess who is a taxpayer funded lobbyist for the Governor to address any “detailed” or “technical” questions (see 3 hours, 25 minutes). He explained that the Governor’s bill was to allow “law abiding” citizens who are in a “lawful place” where they “need to be” (read that as trap) “to carry a firearm because it is their right”. Of course, the bill is not a “firearm” bill, it is an infringement that only applies to handguns. It does not apply to all legal possessors, but it only applies to some citizens who satisfy non-constitutional criteria in the bill.
At the conclusion of witness testimony, Chairman Mike Bell made several important comments to note and preserve about the bill (see 3 hours, 27 minutes). These statements, which are in the video clip at the bottom of this page, included comments as follows:
- “Is it [this bill] everything I may have wanted in a bill that creates permitless carry, no. But it gets the ball further down the field.”
- “I’m glad we are here and again moving the ball further down the court, we may come back to see how this works in a couple of years and come back and make some changes.”
- “its been a journey and this bill gets us closer”
- He also spoke at length about how law enforcement has opposed practically all efforts over the last quarter century to allow citizens to carry firearms or to remove gun free zones. He said “there is not a group that has opposed the expansion of citizens to carry guns more than law enforcement.”
- “The Second Amendment is truly a right that you should not have to go to government in order to recognize.”
- “This bill is not everything that everyone wanted, but it gets the ball further down the field”
Senator Kerry Roberts also made some important comments (see 3 hours 33 minutes), which are also in the video clip at the bottom of this page, that are worth noting:
- “Regardless of what we do today, criminals are unaffected by this … what we are doing today only affects law abiding citizens….”
- “Is this bill Constitutional Carry? Well for many Tennesseans they view it as exactly that … I don’t believe its a true constitutional carry bill. But can I support it or can I not. It gets into that age old question that we wrestle with every legislative session, do we take an incremental gain as the sponsor address and moves it down field or do we hold out for what we really want. Its tough to know the answer to that. Sometimes we take the incremental gain only to find in subsequent sessions that legislators do not want to do any more work on the issue. … If this bill passes out of committee I simply want to say to the Legislators that our work is not done on this bill. Our work is not done on this topic. We are still creating a scenario that law abiding people are having to follow all these processes or all these laws to protect themselves and their love ones and criminals continue to be completely unaffected by this.”
There can be no doubt from listening to the testimony and statements in the Judiciary Committee hearings that the Governor’s bill, SB765/HB786, is only an incremental step ( at best) toward REAL Constitutional Carry. It does not “move the ball” across the goal line for a touchdown but perhaps takes it from the other side’s 20 yard line to the 30 yard line – both are still far short of achieving a constitutional goal.
The Governor’s bill is NOT Real Constitutional Carry. It still leaves processes and procedures even with permitless carry. It does not apply to everyone who can legally possess a firearm. It does not apply to all arms that are protected by the Second Amendment. It has criminal traps in it such as the “lawfully present” clause. It also likely gives rise to an equal protect clause violation under the federal Constitution since it creates classes of 18-20 years old and denies to some of them the capacity to exercise a constitutionally protected right.
Now, step back and consider this concern.
These are elected Senators (and on Representatives on the House side) who are elected by the citizens. They are not appointed by Governor Lee. They are not appointed by the Speaker or the Lt. Governor. They are elected by the people. They are individually accountable first and foremost to their constituents.
As representatives of the citizens, their oath and duty is to the citizens to make sure that their constitutionally recognized and protected rights are not infringed by government action – any government action.
As Senators, they recognized that the Governor’s bill, while perhaps an incremental step, intentionally preserves and perpetuates known infringements on the rights of citizens who can legally possess firearms to carry those firearms. There is no dispute – they knew this when they voted.
Not a single Senator offered an amendment – none – in this Committee to remove the aknowledged existing statutory infringements. No doubt, they received many, many calls bringing this to their attention but yet no such amendment was offered, debated or even discussed as a potential need in the Committee, except by the comments of Senator Kerry Roberts and possibly by the comments of Senator Mike Bell.
So, why not? Why was no amendment discussed or offered to convert the “incremental step” to true goal line objective of REAL constitutional carry?
One reason may be from the fact that it is the Governor’s own bill and that the Governor does not truly believe in or support REAL Constitutional Carry. It may be that the Governor wants to take credit for something he calls “constitutional carry” perhaps to garner political capital. Certainly, if Governor Lee understood what REAL constitutional carry is and he wanted credit for it, this bill would not be an incremental move but it would be full constitutional carry as exists in at least 18 other states as of today. It is not. It may be, therefore, that the absence of an amendment to make this bill Real Constitutional Carry was because of an unwillingness of Bill Lee personally to support Real Constitutional Carry.
Another reason may be that the party leadership in the House or the Senate or both, do not want real constitutional carry. Certainly, with this issue gaining no traction at all over the last 11 years until the Governor made it an issue last February, one might conclude that the Legislative leadership in fact opposes a permitless carry system perhaps in deference to the arguments of law enforcement. Perhaps Legislative leadership would not be moving forward with this incremental step at this time at all but for the party pressure from the Governor’s office (again perhaps he wants a political talking point for his re-election bid). We don’t know precisely what the position of Legislature leadership is at this point but one can infer that it is for, at most, a minimal incremental step that is nothing but limited permitless carry for only some but not all individuals who can legally possess a firearm.
The fact is that under the Constitution, the Legislature is solely authorized to make and set public policy. The Governor’s job is merely administrative. It should be and is the duty and obligation of the Legislature to deal with this issue. At this point, unless the public raises it voice even louder, it appears that the Legislature, as a whole, is unwilling to remove entirely the infringements on your 2nd Amendment protected rights just as it has been the last 25 years. It appears that, absent immense public pressure, that it is at most willing to move forward with an incremental step towards a goal that they are unwilling to achieve – the goal of abiding by the 2nd Amendment’s mandate that the right to bear arms – for all citizens who can legally possess arms – “shall not be infringed.”
Citizens have a right and a duty, in addition to the right protected by the 2nd Amendment to have a voice on public policy and to be heard. That right is stated in Article I, Section 23 of the Tennessee Constitution:
Section 23. That the citizens have a right, in a peaceable manner, to assemble together for their common good, to instruct their representatives, and to apply to those invested with the powers of government for redress of grievances, or other proper purposes, by address of remonstrance.
It is the obligation and right of the citizens to now “instruct” their Legislators and to make clear to the Governor, that if this incremental step is all that the Legislature is willing to take that the step continues to leave material infringements on the rights of all citizens to keep and bear arms. As Senator Kerry observed, if this is all that the Legislature is willing to “give” the citizens in terms of restoring their constitutionally protected rights, it could be years or decades before the remaining infringements are removed – if ever.
It is time for Tennesseans to instruct the Legislators that Tennesseans demand that their constitutionally protected rights be available and fully exercisable in Tennessee. This incremental step falls far short of the goal line. We cannot let them think that we are satisfied with a half-step when our constitutional rights are being infringed.
Sorry, comments are closed for this post.