Tennessee House Overrides Governor's Veto of HB0962

[falcon1]

The Tennessee House voted 69 to 27 to override Governor Bredesen's veto of the "guns in eateries" bill. The Senate will vote tomorrow.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Agape]

THIS IS GREAT!! Thanks for letting us know.

[wpk]

[Pikachu711]

Isn't it great that there are "checks & balances" in our state legislatures!

[02PSD4ME]

Great.. Co-Winkee-Dinkee?

I got my reply from the gov. today on why he vetoed it.

[retsupt99]

Is it expected to pass the Senate?

[orangevol]

Here is the Governor's response to my email...

Here is an email response from Gov Bredesen...

June 3, 2009

Dear Doug:

Thank you for contacting me about gun-related bills which have been considered by the General Assembly this year.

Let me be very clear: I am a strong supporter of the right to keep and bear arms. I am, and have always been, committed to preserving the rights of the Second Amendment. They are basic American rights, protected by the United States Constitution and the Tennessee Constitution as well. Even so, these rights, for more than two centuries, have come with reasonable and necessary rules and guidelines. For this reason, I carefully consider each bill that reaches my desk and evaluate it on its own merits.

As you know, I decided to veto House Bill 962, which would permit the possession of firearms in Tennessee restaurants and bars. In my view, this particular bill crossed the line of reason.

I have been a gun owner for more than 50 years. When I was a young man, I took my first gun safety class-sponsored by the NRA-at my high school. There was one message conveyed during that class that has been imprinted on me since, and it was this: guns and alcohol don't mix. That is as true today as it was then.

It is because of this principle that Tennessee state law has long prohibited the possession of firearms in places that serve alcohol. House Bill 962 would remove this safeguard in a manner that I, as well as many law enforcement officers, believe would be reckless and lacking safeguards to ensure public safety. A key role of government is to ensure public safety. To do that, government must strike a balance between the rights afforded to us by the Constitution and common-sense rules that must be applied to the exercise of these rights.

I believe we can exercise our second amendment rights and common sense at the same time - and guns and bars simply don't mix. Because of this, I vetoed this bill and respectfully asked the legislature to rethink this issue.

As other bills reach my desk-including legislation related to guns in parks, loaded firearms in automobiles, and others-I intend to review them carefully with both the Constitutional rights of gun owners and the safety of the general public in mind. Please be assured that your views are, and will remain, important to me on these issues and others related to state government.

Warmest regards,

Phil Bredesen

[Agape]

I love the way this is going but I do have one question. If this is overridden, does this take effect immediately?

[waynesan]

Is it expected to pass the Senate?

It should pass the Senate with no problem. It passed originally with a bigger percentage than it did in the House.

If this is overridden, does this take effect immediately?

From what I've read from a lot of "internet lawyers", since the bill was written with an effective date of June 1, then if and when the veto is overridden the law will be effective immediately. Regardless of when, it will be soon. Probably tomorrow.

[Agape]

ALL RIGHT!!

SORRY I JUST FOUND THE SMILIES LOL

that last one was for the Gov. LOL

[falcon1]

Is it expected to pass the Senate?

It should, as waynesan said. The conference committee report passed the Senate twenty-four to seven, and is essentially the same bill the Senate has passed for four-plus years. The House was the hold-up, not because the votes weren't there on the floor, but because Speaker emeritas (yes, they actually voted him the title) never let the bill get to the floor, using his ex officio status as a member of all committees to kill it for many years. Only seventeen votes are needed in the Senate to override the governor's veto.

If this is overridden, does this take effect immediately?

From what I've read from a lot of "internet lawyers", since the bill was written with an effective date of June 1, then if and when the veto is overridden the law will be effective immediately. Regardless of when, it will be soon. Probably tomorrow.

If all goes as expected, and the Senate votes to override the veto tomorrow, the bill will become effective as soon as both Speakers sign it, probably a day or so after the Senate override vote.

[AllAmerican]

Wow! That is excellent news!!!

[grandma4]

Man, now why can't North Carolina do that!!

[waynesan]

Man, now why can't North Carolina do that!!

It takes work and determination grandma4. You got to just keep plugging away.

As was mentioned in a previous post - the former House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh used the power of his position to kill most of the pro gun legislation that came before him for the past several years. In many ways he had more power than the governor.

But in the last election the Republicans gained a bare majority in the House and a Republican was voted in as Speaker. This allowed all the bills that had been killed in committees by Naifeh to make it to the House floor and pro gun Republicans and Democrats (of which there are many) voted in favor of the laws as they were given the chance.

Lesson learned?....Elections matter.

[kentuckycarry]

YOU GO NEIGHBOR !!!!!!!!!!