Image Credit: TN General Assembly
The Tennessee Conservative [By Olivia Lupia & Paula Gomes] –
Two pieces of legislation affirming the Second Amendment rights of Tennesseans are moving on to the House Judiciary Committee.
House Joint Resolution 0053 (HJR0053), sponsored by Representative Jay Reedy (R-Erin-District 74), a constitutional amendment solidifying the right to bear arms, passed by a vote of 5 to 1 in the House Civil Justice Subcommittee on Wednesday.
HJR0053 would strike language in current law that allows the legislature to “regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime,” simply leaving the wording as, “citizens of this state have the right to keep and bear arms.”
Sponsored by Rep. Jay Reedy (R-Erin-District 74), this amendment is intended to ensure the legislature cannot infringe on the Second Amendment rights of Tennesseans.
A Representative from the Tennessee Firearms Association testified in favor of the resolution while two other testimonies were heard in opposition during the meeting of the House Civil Justice Subcommittee this week.
One citizen against the resolution stated that while she believes in the right to own a firearm and does own a gun, that her neighbors and other citizens also have the “rights to life and liberty”, so therefore the legislature must retain some control, “with a view to prevent crime,” over how citizens can express their Second Amendment rights. She also referred to the Covenant School shooting and relayed how she and other citizens have, “begged the legislature to take action on the issue,” and believes this resolution moves in the opposite direction of that request.
The resolution passed 5-1 in favor of recommendation to the full committee. However, Reps. Andrew Farmer and Ron Travis, both Republicans, did not vote at all, despite being present at the meeting.
After the HJR’s passage, members of the audience could be heard booing and yelling at committee members.
In the state of Tennessee, a constitutional amendment must be introduced as a House or Senate Joint Resolution, then pass through two consecutive legislative sessions, the first by a simple majority in both House and Senate, the second with a two-thirds majority in each chamber. Should the HJR pass the General Assembly both years, it will then be referred to the general ballot during a gubernatorial election, in this case, the 2026 election.
HJR0053 already passed with the necessary simple majority last year, so it will require a 2/3 majority passage this year to continue its advance through the amendment process.
A bill that redefines what constitutes “deadly force” and its applications, potentially bolstering Second Amendment rights, passed in the House Criminal Justice Subcommittee on Wednesday in a 7 to 2 vote along party lines.
House Bill 0856 (HB0856), sponsored by Representative Kip Capley (R-Summertown-District 71), lowers the standard for the use of deadly force in protecting property. Currently, a subsection in Tennessee Code does not allow the use of deadly force to “terminate” trespass or “unlawful interference with personal property.”
This legislation would “lower the standard for the use of deadly force to protect property” and justify deadly force if a person, “reasonably believes deadly force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other’s actual or attempted trespass; arson; damage to property; burglary; theft; robbery; or aggravated cruelty to animals, serious bodily injury, or death to animals or livestock.”
Deadly force would also be deemed justified if a person “reasonably believes” the property cannot be protected, there are no other means by which to stop the trespasser, or by not using deadly force a third person would be exposed to a risk of death or serious injury.
The legislation would also revise other parts of Tennessee code to ensure citizens cannot be charged with deadly force for simply displaying or brandishing a weapon in defense of their property.
During the meeting on Wednesday, Democrat Rep. Jason Powell expressed apprehension that the bill could lead to harm or deaths of innocent people who may enter others’ property, giving an example of retrieving lost pets.
“Under this bill if I was to try to go find my dog and let’s say had a concealed carry permit or had a weapon on me, and was shot and killed, that person could claim under this bill something to basically have no consequences, to take my life when I’m simply trying to track my dogs. I think it’s a very dangerous bill, that’s just one example, I can think of multiple examples where this goes far beyond any reasonable standard for someone to shoot another person,” he said.
Rep. Capley rebutted by clarifying the bill’s language specifically states the individual would have to prove that deadly force was the only option. He elaborated, “It would be extremely difficult, in my opinion, to prove that someone trying to recoup their dog could not be convinced to come off the property in any other fashion.”
The committee’s other Democrat, Rep. Salinas, echoed Rep. Powell’s sentiments, “If you are using deadly force, you can’t defend yourself because then you’re dead, and we’ve seen cases in the media of people driving up the wrong driveway and trying to sell cookies and have had major violence used against them. And I think this gives people an out for some of the discrimination that we have seen that have been driving a lot of that violence.”
Rep. Capley concluded, “If you shot and killed someone in your driveway that’s selling cookies, that would be extremely difficult to prove in court that deadly force was the only option to get them off your property, that’s not really the point of this bill. The point of this bill is what we had in East Tennessee when we had looting, we had people that lost everything, and we had individuals that didn’t know what to do when they had someone come on their property and stealing all of their things, and they were afraid to use their Second Amendment rights to protect their property… We’re not looking at shooting somebody that’s selling cookies, we’re not looking at trying to injure someone who has lost their dog, that’s not the point of this.”
Speaking in favor of the bill, Rep. Willaim Lamberth reminded the committee that the right to keep and bear arms comes with the responsibility of using common sense in expressing that right, stating, “Just because you have a right to do something to defend yourself, you also have a responsibility to use that right taking into account the circumstances and to value life in every circumstance.”
Both HJR0053 and HB0856 have been scheduled to be heard in the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, April 1st, 2025.
Contact information for members of the committee may be found below.
Rep.andrew.farmer@capitol.tn.gov, rep.elaine.davis@capitol.tn.gov, rep.rebecca.alexander@capitol.tn.gov, rep.fred.atchley@capitol.tn.gov, rep.gino.bulso@capitol.tn.gov, rep.clay.doggett@capitol.tn.gov, rep.rick.eldridge@capitol.tn.gov, rep.johnny.garrett@capitol.tn.gov, rep.torrey.harris@capitol.tn.gov, rep.gloria.johnson@capitol.tn.gov, rep.kelly.keisling@capitol.tn.gov, rep.william.lamberth@capitol.tn.gov, rep.mary.littleton@capitol.tn.gov, rep.jason.powell@capitol.tn.gov, rep.dennis.powers@capitol.tn.gov, rep.lowell.russell@capitol.tn.gov, rep.gabby.salinas@capitol.tn.gov, rep.rick.scarbrough@capitol.tn.gov, rep.tom.stinnett@capitol.tn.gov, rep.chris.todd@capitol.tn.gov, rep.joe.towns@capitol.tn.gov, rep.ron.travis@capitol.tn.gov
Authors contact info:
