A three-judge panel in Gibson County Chancery Court has ruled that Tennessee’s “intent to go armed” law and state park weapon prohibition both violate the Second Amendment and Article I of the Tennessee Constitution. The lawsuit was initially filed against Governor Bill Lee in 2023 by the Gun Owners of America, the Gun Owners Foundation, Stephen L. Hughes, Duncan O’Mara, and Elaine Kehel, claiming that both statutes violate the right of Tennesseeans to bear arms.
Okay, this one is a bit awkward, so follow me. “Intent to go armed” is a statute, most notable in Tennessee, that criminalizes the carrying of any deadly weapon with the intent to use it for unlawful purposes or to intimidate. The distinction between this and what is considered lawful carrying is simply intent. This means that any person carrying a firearm can be stopped and investigated, whether they are exercising their right to permitless carry or holding an enhanced carry permit issued by the state. Further, if it is decided, at the officer’s discretion, of course, that the individual’s “intent” in carrying is to commit a crime or to intimidate, they can be arrested. I’m not sure how the state intends to make that distinction, but it’s starting to sound a lot like Minority Report.
“This statute makes the entire state a ‘gun-free’ zone,” according to the ruling.
Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti’s office attempted to justify “intent to go armed” by arguing that the Second Amendment doesn’t protect the right of people to carry a hand grenade. However, like his hypothesis, the premise of his argument is also flawed, as the Second Amendment does protect the right to carry a hand grenade, but the government violates anything it likes and asks, “What’re you gonna do about it?”
Plaintiffs voiced concern that a Gun Owners Association member holding an enhanced carry permit was not able to lawfully carry a firearm for personal or family defense while visiting Tennessee state parks, congruently arguing that another member fears she will be prosecuted for bringing a weapon to a playground, civic center, or any local government or state-owned property.
Chancellor Michael Mansfield of Trenton, Judge Wyatt Burk of Shelbyville, and Judge Lisa Rice of Elizabethton did not find the state’s case compelling, mainly because it did not address or defend “the constitutional infirmity at the heart of the statute – the criminalization of the constitutional right to bear arms,” according to the ruling.
This brings us to a series of awkward moments in the near future, as the ruling voids the statutes, rendering them unenforceable. At the same time, the panel acknowledges that it doesn’t have the authority to issue an injunction. So what does that mean? Can the state continue to enforce that which a court has ruled unconstitutional? I know, they do it all the time, I’m looking at you, California, and New York. But if that were the case, wouldn’t a federal civil rights suit against the state seem a bit open and shut? If something is ruled unconstitutional, any act to enforce the infringement should be met with its own criminal prosecution and civil punitive liability.
Republican Representative Chris Todd of Madison County views the ruling favorably and has requested that the attorney general’s office appeal the ruling for additional clarity, creating the next potentially awkward moment, as Skrmetti’s office will essentially be arguing against its own previous position.
Of course, no good idea is without its idiot detractors, and today’s woefully inept stooge is Democratic Senator London Lamar of Memphis, chairman of the Senate Democratic Caucus.
“This ruling puts Tennesseans at greater risk by tying the hands of law enforcement officers who encounter people who are armed and potentially dangerous. If police can no longer investigate someone for the intent to go armed, officers are left waiting until a crime has already been committed — a failed public safety policy that puts lives on the line,” said Lamar.
The correct response to this is one of my favorite quotes from Billy Madison.
“What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”
Criminals will still carry guns and commit crimes, because that’s what they do. Sending law enforcement out for a constant diet of harassing legally armed citizens seems more like an exercise in chasing your tail and wasting taxpayer dollars alongside police resources. Lamar’s gripe about waiting for a crime to be committed is also somewhat telling, as it not only validates my Minority Report concern but also highlights his own stance on due process and the understanding that an individual is innocent until proven guilty. Someone may want to remind him that this is America, but then I’d have to be reminded that it doesn’t matter, because he’s a Democrat.
