Ammo For Sale

« « When pigs err cats fly? | Home | Statement from Rep. Curry Todd on the veto » »

Bredesen to veto guns in restaurants that serve alcohol bill?

So speculates The Tennessean.

Update: KnoxNews says he will veto it.

Veto can be overridden with a simple majority. I guess he really doesn’t have future aspirations for political office in the state.

Update: Officially vetoed. And Serpas misrepresents the bill:

We cannot support legislation that openly allows consumption of alcohol where guns are present

Drinking while strapped would still be illegal under the bill.

Still, the bill has the votes for an override. Already being called symbolic. Like ACK said Bredesen Announces He No Longer Wishes To Pursue Statewide Politics In Tennessee. Yup.

Rep. Curry Todd has already said the override proceedings start next week.

One more update: Bredesen’s statement is here.

21 Responses to “Bredesen to veto guns in restaurants that serve alcohol bill?”

  1. Ron W Says:

    I’m wondering what evidence AGAINST Tennessee Gun Permit Holders may be influencing the Governor?

    Or is it the same ignorance, bigotry and prejudice toward Tennessee Gun Permit holders wherby they are presumed to become dangerous idiots or criminals when their rights are expanded…such as has been and is regularly published by Tennessean from its editorial board, columnists and some letter-to-the-editor writers.

  2. wizardpc Says:

    Nashville Police Chief Serpas also reportedly said in the meeting that “Weapons in bar fights are never a good thing.”

    So I guess that means Nashville cops will be leaving their guns, tazers, and nightsticks in their patrol cars when responding to calls at restaurants that serve alcohol.

  3. wizardpc Says:

    Oh, and he wouldn’t even RESPOND to Nikki Goeser’s request to speak with him about this.

    Her husband was murdered right in front of her by her stalker in a bar where the couple worked. She has a carry permit and, as per the law, had her weapon in the car when it happened.

  4. Metulj Says:

    I like the whole “No desire for statewide office” thing. I would be surprised if Bredesen stays in Tennessee. Look, this is nothing more than a smack on the ass of the most childish legislative session in this state’s history. I am ambivalent about the guns in bars thing as folks already carry guns in bars and it still makes it illegal to drink alcohol if you are in the bar with your gun. It’s all symbolic with Bredesen getting the last laugh (BTW, I despise Bredesen). They’ll veto it and push off the budget vote for another week or so.

  5. SayUncle Says:

    metulj, i’m sure it is. But bredesen has historically been friendly to gun owners. NRA endorsed and signed a few good bills into law.

  6. Metulj Says:

    Some people are saying he’s after Alexander’s seat. If he does go after Alexander’s seat, there had better not be one shooting in a bar by a non-drinking patron HCP holder or he is totally off the hook on this veto. He’s just the kind of politician who would do it too.

    I agree with you on his history and I don’t think this veto is about guns. I think it is being abused with working with some of the most piss-poor excuses for legislators in the world of democracies — and that cuts across party lines.

  7. SayUncle Says:

    he and alexander both recently got anti-gun junk in their trunk. Lamar! voted against the park carry bill.

  8. Metulj Says:

    Well, Alexander can always say he voted against the credit card bill to which that gun bill was a rider — a practice that should be banned.

  9. John Says:

    “We cannot support legislation that openly allows consumption of alcohol where guns are present”

    What’s the big deal? In Florida we can drink while carrying and just like the predictions of blood in the streets if we approved carry there hasn’t been a problem yet.

  10. John Says:

    “We cannot support legislation that openly allows consumption of alcohol where guns are present”

    And furthermore, the good folks of Tennessee have no problem allowing people to drink and get in their cars. You don’t refuse to serve people who have car keys do you?

  11. wildbill Says:

    I guess a symbolic removal of Dem’s for government should be enstated for theb asses that think goverment is for them but not for thee

  12. mike hollihan Says:

    It’s strictly symbolic. My guess is he’s leaving room for some Dem legislators to walk back from their actual vote (which approved the measure) so they can act contrite and remorseful to their Democratic base back home. It gives those hypocrites time to see which way they can claim they voted by the time re-election rolls around.

    Watch to see who changes their vote in the veto override.

  13. Ymal Brucker Says:

    Hmm. We here in Texas can not only take a concealed weapon into places where alcohol is served, but we can consume alcohol as well.

    So far as I know, there’s not been a problem since the law was enacted some fourteen years ago.

    It could be that we Texans are more responsible and sober than the folks in Tennessee. Or it could be we have a Republican governor.

    Let me think…

  14. BulletBillSR Says:

    It’s not only a slap in the face to Nicole Goeser but to some 230,000 law abiding carry permit holders. Some may call our legislators “piss poor excuses” but that’s just evades the issue. Most of the people want the right to self defense but they won’t go to the trouble of getting a carry permit. I’ve had a carry permit in various states since 1963 and never had to shoot anyone and sure don’t want to. Attorneys get downright expensive.

    Point is the bill was never about carrying a gun into a bar at midnight on Saturday night. It was about the right to carry in a family restaurant that chooses to serve alcohol. It always been against the law to drink and carry and HB 962 doesn’t change that. Restaurants have always had the right to post their properties and that doesn’t change either. I’m not as worried as some about someone breaking into my car and stealing my gun as I am being mugged on the way to it. As Nicole said in her article, “when seconds count, the cops are only minutes away. I’m sure Ronal Serpas winces a bit every time he hears but he should. The supreme court has ruled that the cops have no duty to protect the individual citizen and that means self defense is a very personal thing.

    I just hope that many of those who read this will get busy and call the apeaker of the house and the senate majority leader to get an override going.

  15. Pat Patterson Says:

    Well, there is that line from Shooter, where Mark Wahlberg’s character says, “Welcome to Tennessee. The patron state of shootin’ stuff.” Maybe the governor was a little hazy on the concept.

  16. ajacksonian Says:

    I always thought that TN was ‘The Land of Browning’… and damned proud of it!

    Perhaps we can look at gun deaths from the mid-19th century when saloons and ranges went together. Really, if there was a horrific onslaught of wholesale killing in the streets it would be the mid-19th century where it was respectable to not only carry, but demonstrate you could be most accurate with a pint or two behind you. Somehow things like cholera, typhus and such always get top billing and blood in the streets, especially in the UK, but in Germany and elsewhere, the concept of not being armed made you truly a subject, not a citizen.

    But then I do forget we are too civilized to survive.

  17. Steve in TN Says:

    Serpas is only interested in getting income from speeders on I-440. Crimefighting via speedtraps…

  18. wizardpc Says:

    Metulj said: “Well, Alexander can always say he voted against the credit card bill to which that gun bill was a rider — a practice that should be banned.”

    Not quite. I know he voted against the amendment. I think he voted for the final bill.

  19. Rich Says:

    I live in Massachusetts one of the most gun owner hostile states you’ll ever find.

    Even Mass does not prevent those with a permit from carrying in establishments that serve alcohol. There is not even a restriction on drinking and carrying (although it’s an incredibly dumb thing to do).

    To the commenter that was complaining about the “piss poor legislators” in TN, I’ll trade you the ones in Mass sight unseen.

  20. chris Says:

    Democrats and guns.

    Just like the “pro-gun” Senator from NY who replaced Hillary.

  21. John Kindrick Says:

    I have both guns and likker in my house, so where is all the drunken-wild-ass fightin and shootin? Must be Im not be doin it rite.

    Oh, wait. Start with bars and restaurants, then move to the homes. You cant have both booze and guns in yer house? Stranger things have happened, somewhere.

    On the veto, maybe Bredesen sees this as a suck-up to the Obama crowd in hopes of snagging a fed gov job…