Carr bill aims to prevent feds from enforcing U.S. gun laws in TN

Wednesday, January 16, 2013 at 10:05pm

Congressional hopeful and state Rep. Joe Carr wants to ensure that any new gun restrictions handed down from Washington, D.C., go unenforced in the Volunteer State.

Carr, a Lascassas Republican, is introducing a bill that would slap federal officials with a Class A misdemeanor for enforcing new federal gun laws, executive orders, rules or regulations.

“It’s our attempt to push back on the federal government’s ever-increasing encroachment not only on our personal liberties but on our state sovereignty, and this is what we’re going to do. We’ve had enough, and enough is enough,” he told reporters at a press conference in Murfreesboro.

Under Carr’s proposal, House Bill 42, state troopers would have the authority to arrest federal officers, although he said he believed, but is not certain, the practice would be legal and added it would face a likely challenge by the courts if passed.

President Barack Obama unveiled 23 executive orders and a handful of legislative priorities Wednesday to address gun control in the wake of last month’s shooting at a Connecticut elementary school that left 20 students and six adults dead. Proposals include re-instituting an assault weapons ban and require a universal background check for anyone wanting to buy a gun.

Such a bill making it illegal for a federal agent to enforce federal laws almost guarantees a court challenge, said Ed Yarbrough, a former Middle Tennessee U.S. district attorney.

“There would be some issues with the concept of a state law more or less creating it a crime for a federal agent to enforce a federal law,” Yarbrough said. “It will probably have to be hashed out in the courts, and that will take years.”

While applauding the president’s gun control plan, the Tennessee Democratic Party sent out a press release scolding Carr, who is considering a bid for the 4th Congressional District in 2014.

“The state legislature could act to reduce gun violence locally, too. But instead, extreme politicians like Joe Carr are presenting legally suspect plans that would make criminals of officers who are working to protect our families. It's as disgraceful as it is self-serving,” said party Chairman Chip Forrester in an emailed statement.

On Obama’s proposals, Rep. Diane Black said, “While I will thoroughly review all of the president’s recommendations, I will not support any measure that undermines our Second Amendment right to bear arms. Addressing the symptom, rather than the root of the problem, will not make our children or society safer,” said Congressman Diane Black of the sixth congressional district.

77 Comments on this post:

By: Captain Nemo on 1/18/13 at 11:47

By: wasaw on 1/18/13 at 11:07
I've noticed that many of the writers on this issue have run out of facts and have resorted to name calling. How many of you "gun-haters" were not born and raised in Tennessee?

I just love it when someone tries to reason with someone with a different opinion by interjecting that they are being horrible, by “name calling” and then name calling that person.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/18/13 at 11:53

Before you ask wasaw, I have guns and know how to use them. I have no quarrel with guns, but I do have reservation about who should be able to own them and why the Hell do they need to have a 100 round clip to kill a deer?

By: Captain Nemo on 1/18/13 at 12:01

There is one more thing wasaw. I am a native Tennessean and why the hell do you have in question anyone’s motive for living in Tennessee? And don’t be so smug about the State being Red. It is purple and could go Blue soon when the people see how silly its GOP lawmakers are.

By: joe41 on 1/18/13 at 6:50

Rep. Carr, why don't you do something constructive for the state of Tennessee. If the federals come to enforce the law, then I will help them. I am for making our children and seniors safer, not for protecting your misguided view of Tennessee.


By: amyinsparta on 1/18/13 at 7:16

Why is it that pro gun people oppose a ban on assault weapons? Don't give me the silly "It's our right in the 2nd amendment of bear arms." You and I know that muskets do not even remotely relate to assault weapons. You treat the Constitution the same way you treat the Bible-every word is gospel and should be adhered to forever. You never seem to understand that societies change and what the original writers thought was the way to go 2000 years ago and 250+- years ago is not applicable to 2013. Times change, people change, and laws have to change to reflect it. I might add that the 2nd amendment was not added because the founding fathers thought everyone should have a gun. It was enacted because they had to excuse wealthy landowners having an arsenal so that should the slaves revolt ,they would have guns enough to put it down. But they couldn't just give them guns and no other free men, and so the amendment was added. All the flowery words about men needing to be armed against a evil govt. was just that-flowery words. So get off your high horses and get some common sense. We don't need assault weapons, we don't need bullets that explode inside the person. We don't need anything but pistols, hunting guns, and target shooting guns. The average citizens has no need for anything else, regardless of what the NRA tells you.

By: amyinsparta on 1/18/13 at 7:25

Also, ancienthighway, Stalin actually gave guns out to those good citizens who supported him who then went about the job of dispatching the opposition with glee. He handed out thousands of guns.Then he became dictator and starved millions of people when he confiscated farms with the help of his thug army, the same way Hitler took care of the Jews and other 'unfits'. Hitler gave guns to the Brown Shirts, his civilian soldiers and they were his thugs. So the two most evil men of the 20th century did little to no gun confiscation.

I think we need to spend more time reading history and less time listening to the NRA and Rush.

By: govskeptic on 1/19/13 at 10:46

I always look for the long and numerous explanations from ASK01 along with the
considered Democratic rantings of pswindle before I make up my mind on these
complicated issues!

By: Captain Nemo on 1/19/13 at 11:31

Hello Amy in Sparta. You must be a rarity in your community? Welcome to this board. I hope to see your post more often, ;-)

By: Captain Nemo on 1/19/13 at 11:34

Morning gov, so what has your mind concluded?

By: pswindle on 1/20/13 at 1:08

It amazes me how much power a little nothing like Carr thinks that he has, and if he could stop or change anything. He is not even in the US House, yet.

By: govskeptic on 1/21/13 at 8:57

Name calling is the purpose of a majority of posters on this site. Over a few years
of doing so the number of posters has dwindled to virtually the same 15-18. It will
be more interesting when it gets down to about 10.

By: Ask01 on 1/21/13 at 9:49

Posting on boards is cyclic, govskeptic. People come and go. Some go away angry or just plain lose interest, finding alternate boards where they are more comfortable.

Often boards will become right or left wing oriented, or as in one case I recall, the domain of a few sophmoric individuals.

I come here because so many other boards require facebook, and I refuse to be sucked into facebook.

Sorry for the saga length posts. I've always had difficulty adopting a condensed version, as I want to be as precise as possible. Plus, I have a student at a magnet school, so we naturally engage in vocabulary building as well as trying to be specific with written and oral communication. Never create confusion with one or two vague words when 9 or 10 specifics will generate clarity and understanding.

By: GUARDIAN on 1/21/13 at 6:39

This board proves there is no longer a Party of Jackson in Nashville. Just a gang of evil communist fleas with no honor and no truth to be found in their worthless souls. You say you laugh at all those who know your worthless but in fact it is the other way around. Perhaps one day soon you'll get to back up your pitiful words with deeds or show your ability to sound intelligent while running at top speed. lol... GUARDIAN-GOD, COUNTRY, FAMILY and FRIENDS. The American Way.

By: CrimesDown on 1/21/13 at 7:42

What really amazes me is that people label anyone that disagrees with restriction of gun rights as "gun nuts". I am not a nut and as far as I can tell, I am respected by my neighbors, past co-workers, employers and business connections. I have used guns since the first time I shot my grandfathers pistol at age 6. I have possessed and used guns professionaly, since the age of 24 until I retired less than 2 years ago. I think one main reason people call people like me a "gun nut", is because they can't argue their views rationally, so they resort to name calling. I build guns and I am very proficient in the use of guns and people that use them to commit crimes, including murder. As far as weapons used to commit crimes, AR15 and AK47 type weapons are no where near the top of the list. I don't think gun restriction proponents want to discuss any of the facts and statistics rationally, but if you do, I'll be glad to have that conversation.

By: Loner on 1/22/13 at 6:07

NRA = Nuts, Rednecks & A-holes. Is that the "American way"? Sounds like the Confederate way, but not the American way....give it a rest, the South "done lost", as they say in Dixie.

Joe Carr should be arrested for inciting sedition and treason against the United States of America....this guy is a Nut...a Redneck and an A-hole..... Yes, Joe Carr is NRA all the way.

By: Loner on 1/22/13 at 6:12

Joe Carr is a domestic terrorist? Mister President: Put this Tennessee stud on a no-fly list...better yet, put a drone on his @ss and eliminate the threat....thanks.

By: morpheus120 on 1/22/13 at 8:12

For you "conservatives" who like to lecture the rest of us on the U.S. Constitution, I want to remind you that in this country the Government is elected by the People.That's right. That evil "Big Government" you keep railing about... your friends, family, and neighbors keep voting overwhelmingly in favor of it, no matter how many hundreds of millions of dollars your corporate masters pump in to the election to try and steal it.

So in other words, by being against "the Government" you are by default against the will of the people.

This whole debate is revealing the true face of the right-wing gun nuts. They are anti-democracy and prefer a fascist/authoritarian form of government that agrees only with them and their notion of "pure" American values (read into that what you will). You really can't get much more anti-American than that.

As far as I am concerned, if you are against the Government, you are against the people and are therefore an enemy of the state. I fully support any measures necessary to protect America from ALL enemies - foreign AND DOMESTIC.

If all you weekend warriors want to have your little revolution, I say go ahead already. I'll be more than happy to watch the Feds round all you closet Nazis up or execute you for treason. God knows y'all have it coming for pushing us into two wars, breaking the bank, and then holding the country hostage over debt ceilings and such.

It may be time to thin the herd.

By: ancienthighway on 1/22/13 at 9:02

CrimeDowns, you're correct. Assault weapons, even in gang warfare, plays a small role, in crime. The potential for use in mass killings by psychologically unstable people is a different story. They've been used before, and they'll be used again. While just banning assault weapons doesn't gather up all the ones already out there, it will reduce the number of new assault weapons made available to the public.

Inflammatory speech from both sides does nothing to solve the problem. The problem is violent crimes committed with a gun. Many have cited the crime rate in Chicago with it's gun restrictions. Now some facts. While gun restricted Chicago is safer than just 8% of various cities, 10.33 violent crimes and 43.91 property crimes per 1,000 residents. Nashville with it's relaxed gun laws is safer than just 5%. 11.94 violent crimes and 49.32 property crimes per 1,000 residents. The presence or absence of gun restrictions doesn't appear to make a difference with these two cities.

Looking further into Chicago confirms what I've long believed. Gun violence is concentrated in specific areas of the city, while all but absent in other areas. When it's broken down more, the majority of the participants range in age from mid-teen to mid-twenty in age. Finally, the report goes on to say that the causality of the gun related crime is directly tied to gang turf war and gang drug trade. While I haven't found a similar breakdown for Nashville, I believe the same type of information would be found.

Carry your handgun around town if it makes you feel safer. Keep your rifles and shotguns handy for home defense. Do so responsibly. But an assault gun? Can you really afford to make the house repairs that gun would do? And if you live in adjoining housing, can you afford the consequences of rounds you fire penetrating your neighbor's home and injuring an innocent?

By: mars on 1/22/13 at 9:59

i was born in WVa and was called a hillbilly when i was young. I put myself through college and had a good career. Now, retired and living in Tn with is kind of leadership, when someone asks me were I am from, I never tell them Tn - too humiliating. Rather be considered a toothless soot covered coal miner than a gun toting redneck covered in tatoos and ignorance

By: CrimesDown on 1/22/13 at 12:59

ancienthighway...One of the things I don't care for is people calling an AR15 type weapon an "assault" weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle. Some people tend to ignore the true definition of an assault weapon. That definition includes the fact that the weapon would be fully automatic. I have a 22 rimfire Remington that holds 18 rounds. I can reload it in a matter of seconds. Maybe 5 seconds instead of 3-4 seconds for my S&W .223. While the .223 is more powerful, the .22 is very effective.

In my opinion, because of our unwillingness to address the true problems, when it comes to sick people that would comit these unthinkable crimes, some people are wasting time addressing something that will do little, if anything, to solve the problem. It's very similar to the recent "fad" of taxing or limiting the amount of sugar someone can ingest. Because someone determines that we have obese citizens, the government inacts laws that not only affects the people that have no self controll or parental guidance, but others that do. Most laws like these and past, so called assault weapons bans, do little, if anything, to address the problem but makes some people "feel' better. I would rather "be" safe, than "feel" safe.

By: Loner on 1/22/13 at 8:15

Crimes Down has a point, let's include more firearms in the "assault" category, not just those that look like military assault weapons...a firearm - hand gun or long gun - should be banned, if it's semi-automatic, meaning that it fires one round with each pull of the trigger....especially those semis with magazines that hold more than 10 rounds....regardless of the weapon's size, bore, appearance, name or claimed purpose.

The 2nd amendment was put in place, so that members of state militia in the South could rightfully keep and bear arms, in order to stamp out any slave rebellions that might take place. Certainly, the problematic amendment's original purpose has long since expired....time to abolish it.

By: CrimesDown on 1/22/13 at 9:27

ancienthighway...See Loners post? It's amazing to me. That's why this problem won't be solved.

By: CrimesDown on 1/22/13 at 9:32

Loner said..."a firearm - hand gun or long gun - should be banned, if it's semi-automatic, meaning that it fires one round with each pull of the trigger....especially those semis with magazines that hold more than 10 rounds....regardless of the weapon's size, bore, appearance, name or claimed purpose".

Every gun made fires "one round with each pull of the trigger".

I apologize for respnding to you Loner. I won't make that mistake again.

By: ancienthighway on 1/22/13 at 10:48

Agreed CrimesDown. There is Loner on one end in his ignorant and misguided campaign to abolish the 2nd Amendment, and then there are the gun owners ready to take up arms against any form of government action under the Democratic presidency. That side is just egged on by the NRA, whose goal is profit for it's biggest supporters, under the pretense of the 2nd Amendment is in danger. Until both sides open their eyes and then open their minds to finding a workable solution, the true problem will never be addressed.

By: yogiman on 1/23/13 at 9:04

Well, you gave the point on the issue, achhienthighway. Stalin gave guns to his fellow citizens who were supporting him. Wouldn't you want your neighbor whom you know would help you against an enemy to have a gun. Would you want your enemy to also have a gun?

History tells you all dictators have first taken their citizens guns away from all citizens.

The UN want's gun control to put them in charge of a one world government and Barry feels he should be their one world dictator.

By: yogiman on 1/23/13 at 9:26

Haven't you done any research on Obama, anchienthighway? If you have, tell me who the man is.

And no, his political party nor his race has anything to do with my argument. But if you haven't done any background check on him, let me give you a bit. According to his autobiography he was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Yet no one can find a copy of his official birth certificate and no hospital in Hawaii will acknowledge his birth for the free publicity.

Even if he was born in Hawaii, his father was a British subject making him a British subject, not a natural born American citizen.

But let's presume he was a natural born citizen; he was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather to become an Indonesian citizen thereby losing his American natural born citizen status.

The fact congress will not bring the issue and the courts will not accept a case should tell you the communist party has gotten deep into our nation. And when they get our guns out of our pockets, they have won the race.

Now let's ask: when did he become a naturalized American citizen? He was given the name Barry Soetoro when adopted in Indonesia, when did he officially change his name back to Barack Obama? Or has he to either question?

Why has he refused to show his papers? Was he a foreign student? If he was, how can he be a natural born citizen?

By: CrimesDown on 1/23/13 at 10:39

yogiman....From what I have seen on the matter you are discussing, I have my beliefs. I believe Barry Soetoro was born in Hawaii. I would be willing to bet that the main reason he doesn't want to release his college applications and grades is for one main reason. I think Obama applied for college as a foriegn student. I don't believe he was, I just think he lied and said he was, to take advantage of the system. If this is true, people would take this in many different ways. He wouldn't be the first person to do this, but it wouldn't make it right. I would also bet that he was given advise to do this by family, possibly. I'm sure at the time running for POTUS was the last thing on his mind. There is some reason for Obama not to release his applications and transcripts. Now that he has been re-elected to his second term, he should go ahead and release them. Voters have already proven that either, they don't care, or are very forgiving. If people cared, he wouldn't have been re-elected. If a Republican president had waddled their way through their first term and had the results that Obama had, the media would have crusified them and they would never have been re-elected.