Veto of guns-in-bars bill may not stick

Source: The Tennessean

Gov. Phil Bredesen vetoed a bill Thursday that would have allowed handgun carry permit holders to take their weapons in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, sending a message that may prove only symbolic.

Bredesen delivered the veto before an assembled group of law enforcement officers, saying that he opposed the bill while supporting Second Amendment rights.

"Americans have also understood for more than two centuries that there are sensible rules to be applied to the exercise of those rights," Bredesen said. "I believe this bill crosses that line."

snip

Nashville attorney John Harris, executive director of the Tennessee Firearms Association, said Bredesen's veto was "futile" in the face of lawmakers' previous support.

"It just demonstrates an amazing amount of arrogance for him to think he can veto this," Harris said.


Read more: http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090529/NEWS0201/905290369/Veto+of+guns-in-bars+bill+may+not+stick

And bar owners aren't responsible for the safety of people on their premises.

As someone who carries a concealed weapon, this law makes sense. If I want to go to Applebies or Ruby Tuesdays for lunch while carrying I can (as long as I don't drink). If I want to hear a band play at a bar while carrying, I can (as long as I don't drink). The gun owners who carry concealed are fastidious about following these laws.

No, what it demonstrates is good sense- when the first drunken shooting breaks out, the Governor won't be blamed for it.

Unfortunately, jerks like John Harris won't be either.

What it does is allow people who AREN'T drinking to come in the building without violating the law.

I suspect the governor foresees what's likely to happen sooner or later here- and doesn't want any part of it.

But contrary to the hysteria, concealed carry hasn't resulted in traffic shootouts, mall massacres, or any of the other things people claimed would be a daily occurance, because people who get a concealed-carry license are doing so because they are in the large majority law-abiding. That means that no, most of them aren't going to carry without a license, and most aren't going to drink while carrying.

So each bartender is going to have to ask if the patron requesting a drink is carrying before they can be served? Once you say it is alright for somebody to carry a concealed weapon into a bar (probably slightly less dangerous at Applebees but still not a good idea) how are you going to enforce the 'no drink' provision. Sure after the gun fight breaks out and people are killed you can add that to the list of crimes a person is prosecuted for but that isn't going to help the people that are injured or killed. Come on, anybody that has ever been around the more rowdy bars has seen people get in fights for something as simple as bumping into somebody do you really want to add availability of guns to that mix doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

It's not like every bar contains metal detectors at the door and an armed guard to make sure nobody's carrying. Do you really think that only breaking one law instead of two is going to dissuade somebody who doesn't give a shit?

but he's over reacting.

Even MA with it's draconian gun control laws allows CCW holders to carry where ever alcohol is served.

Same rule applies though... no drinking while carrying.

and those that sell guns to these crazy people won't stop until they have a monopoly on laws in this country so that nothing impedes their incentive to make money selling and manufacturing more gun$$$.

America has an incentive to make money off of fear and danger. What a great precedent.

every place we go too.