Posts

Columbia D.A. Dropped Charges Against Civilian with PTSD For Showing Up To School with an AR-15 – Did Police Ask Him to Be There?

/in , , , /by

Video of Roy Brooks, a former firefighter with a history of PTSD, on campus with Columbia police pointing his weapon at people – and an account by the principal – bring up more disturbing questions about Columbia PD’s response to an active shooter hoax last year, and seem to back up his attorney’s claim that they asked him to join them.

In August of 2023, Roy Brooks, a former firefighter in Columbia, Tennessee, was indicted by a Maury County grand jury on a charge of carrying a weapon on school property during a response to an active shooter call that turned out to be a hoax – despite Brooks not being a law enforcement officer, and having no official capacity with any response team.

In May of 2023, Brooks had reportedly responded in full tactical gear and carrying an AR-15 rifle to the scene when a call of an active shooter at Columbia Central High School came in. The call turned out to be a hoax. Charges were brought against Brooks by D.A. Brent Cooper, making headlines at the time.

Brooks was scheduled for trial in May of this year, but Cooper quietly dropped the charges right before it was scheduled to begin.

From Main Street Media:

Charges dropped against ex-Columbia firefighter Roy Brooks

May 21, 2024

Days before he was set to face trial for carrying a weapon on school property, former Columbia firefighter Roy Brooks saw his case dismissed instead.

District Attorney Brent Cooper made the announcement that the charge against Brooks would not be pursued. In a May 21 statement, Cooper said, “After doing an in-depth review of the facts of the case and the applicable law, I came to the conclusion that a jury may find reasonable doubt as to Mr. Brooks’ guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, the ethical action was to submit an order of Nolle Prosequi, meaning that the State chooses not to proceed further with the case.”

If Brooks was on campus with an AR-15, which is not in dispute, and he was not a part of any law enforcement agency, the question becomes – why did D.A. Cooper drop the charges?

One possible explanation comes from Brooks’ attorney David Christensen, who claims Brooks had been asked to be at the scene by Columbia Police. From the Main Street article:

“His attorney, David Christensen, said at a November hearing that Brooks had in fact been asked to be at the scene. Brooks had previously served with Columbia’s S.W.A.T. unit and reportedly knew many of the officials who responded to the hoax.”

Brooks rejected a plea deal of one year of probation, choosing instead to face trial and a potential two-year prison sentence, which seems to show some real conviction about this explanation on his part.

It’s worth noting, as Main Street does, that Brooks was let go from the Fire Department under concerning circumstances, including claims of PTSD:

“Brooks was terminated in May 2022 by the Columbia Fire Department after multiple allegations against him, including sexual harassment and violation of the city’s sick leave policy. Columbia’s Civil Service Board upheld the firing in August 2022 and a federal wrongful termination lawsuit filed by Brooks was dismissed in January 2024.”

The Tennessee Star wrote about Brooks’ departure from the Fire Department when it happened, highlighting his PTSD in their story:

“A firefighter in Columbia, Tennessee, suffering from PTSD and undergoing treatment, was first demoted and then dismissed only four years before his retirement.

Roy Brooks, who served as a Firefighter Captain in the city of Columbia, was questioned during a meeting earlier this year by a Chief Officer asking if he was in a “dark place?”

Brooks tells us that this demonstrated that the Fire Department was aware that his behavior was not normal for him.

He was called in by the administration on April 11th and demoted from the rank of Captain to that of Firefighter for “3 separate incidents.”  Brooks told The Tennessee Conservative that this was the first time he had been made aware of two of the “incidents”.

During the meeting with the administration, Brooks was made to sign a last chance agreement form that should have been effective until his retirement in approximately four years.

Part of the agreement was for Brooks to attend Employee Assistance mental health Program (EAP) sessions.  Brooks tells us that he attended the sessions and additionally researched PTSD.

He used some of his accrued sick leave for the next several shifts due to panic attacks that occurred the nights before as he was packing and getting ready to go to work.

Brooks tells us that the time off made him realize how much he was suffering mentally and his acceptance of this prompted his wife to open up to him about his behavior over the past year.

“I had no idea what a bad place I was in,” Brooks said.”

That happened in 2022.

Just one year later, Brooks was on Columbia High’s campus with an AR-15. That much is not in dispute, and The Holler has now seen video of it. In the video (seen below in screen grabs, we do not yet have possession of the video itself), Brooks is very clearly walking with the police during their response to the scene in a manner that shows they were no doubt aware of his presence.

At one point in the video, Brooks can be seen pointing his AR-15 at cars with people in them.

Since Brooks had a history of PTSD-related issues with the fire department which resulted in him being let go, and he was not a police officer, if Columbia Police did ask him to show up with a weapon and join them as they moved on a building full of teachers and children it seems they are now the ones with questions to answer.

And we may not be alone in thinking as much. We have obtained the disciplinary file of recently terminated Columbia High principal Dr. Michael Steele, whose account of that day alleges Brooks was also INSIDE the building with the weapon, where students were located, and actually may have been “in a group” that pointed weapons at the Vice Principal.

In his account, Dr. Steele says he was not informed by law enforcement that Brooks had been on campus with the weapon, he was only informed by a “non-faculty coach” – who told him Brooks had at one point tried to “run him off the road” and was showing up at games, which Steele said he couldn’t do anything about:

“On August 15, 2023, one of my non-faculty coaches came to my office and informed me that he was having a problem with a former co-worker. He advised this co-worker followed him and attempted to run him off the road. He produced a police report and told me he was concerned about his former co-worker showing up at the game on Friday. Following our meeting, I informed my administration and SROs. I went on to advise the district safety coordinator, superintendent, and associate superintendent via phone. I was told by all three they were aware of this person but there was nothing I could do to him if he decided to attend the game. We went back and forth a few times, but ultimately I was told I could not ask this man to leave if he came to the game.”

At which point the coach told Dr. Steele about Brooks being on campus with the weapon:

“On August 22, 2023, my coach came back to my office and said, “Dr. Steele, this is your school, and you need to be aware of this. Back in May, (Brooks) came to your school with an AR15 assault rifle and joined with the SWAT Team to clear your building. (Brooks) has no affiliation with any law enforcement agency but did come on your campus with a weapon.”

Steele says he went to Superintendent Lisa Ventura about it:

“On the morning of August 23, 2023, I emailed Mrs. Ventura and Mr. Stacey and requested an urgent meeting to discuss this issue. Mrs. Ventura responded and said she would be in my office at 8:30am. I explained to Mrs. Ventura how concerned I was that I was never notified in May that a man armed with an AR-15 entered my school. I went on to explain why it was important for me to know about what is happening in my school. I’m going to paraphrase what Mrs. Ventura said: “Dr. Steele, not everyone needed to know. This man was a threat and should have been arrested in May. I had to go over the Sheriff’s head and report this to the Tennessee Department of Investigation (TBI). We’ve been watching this man and he sits out on his front porch in full tactical gear watching Mt. Pleasant middle school. We see him on camera entering your school.He pulls up in his POV, slings on his AR15 and enters your school with the SWAT team. He was also in the group that pointed his weapon at Ms. Cathey (Assistant Principal).

Note: This meeting lasted fifty minutes, and during that entire time Mrs. Ventura affirms that (Brooks) entered my school with an assault rifle. She goes on to say she deemed him a threat and he should have been arrested.”

Steele says he was very bothered by his talk with Ventura:

“After our meeting, I was very disturbed. I knew there had to be several things missing in this entire event, but there is never any justification for not notifying the schools principal and SROs… (Brooks) had no affiliation with law enforcement and should never have been on campus. Furthermore, it was public knowledge that (Brooks) was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression. There was absolutely no excuse for not letting me and my SROs know about this incident, and to find out about it almost three months later from a non-faculty coach is still very disturbing to me. I/we had every reason to believe that there was a threat looming for those two and a half months. It wasn’t till much later we found out (Brooks) was a former SWAT medic, and he knew several if not all the SWAT team that responded in May.

That same day, I called the Chairman of the School Board and reported Mrs. Ventura’s actions. I explained how frustrated I was, and he agreed, I should have been notified. He went on to say, he nor the school board were ever notified as well. During that conversation, I told the Board Chair, that it gave me no pleasure, but I felt compelled to file a grievance for hostile work environment and dereliction of duty. He said he understood and that he was not happy at all with how this was handled. That same day, I filed a grievance against Mrs. Ventura.”

Steele then goes on to say he, not Ventura, was suspended – then reinstated:

“On Friday, August 25, 2023, Mrs. Ventura came to my school to have a fifteen-minute meeting with my staff. During that meeting, Mrs. Ventura was not being transparent in my opinion, so I asked her a question. I asked, “Did you or did you not tell me you thought (Brooks) was a threat?” Mrs. Ventura was not happy with my question and told me I could leave or go home. Approximately 40 minutes later, I was suspended without pay pending an investigation. On September 8, 2023, I was reinstated as the principal of Columbia Central High School but received this reprimand.”

Steele ends the account with:

“I should not have been lied to for nearly fifty minutes by my superintendent. This entire incident could have been handled very easily, but there are several political factors at play, and trying to cover those things has proven challenging.

This is a synopsis of events. The entire story is even more compelling, but I did not want to bother whoever may read this with a ten-page response. If this comes up in the future, please offer me an opportunity to answer questions or explain in detail.”

We reached out to Dr. Steele to let him explain, but so far have not heard back. His contract with Columbia High was not renewed, but East Limestone High in Alabama just announced he has been hired there.

Again: Brooks claims, through his attorney, that he was asked to be there during the response by law enforcement. Judging by the fact that the charges were dropped, it seems D.A. Cooper thinks Brooks may have a point.

If so, the question then becomes: Why did law enforcement ask Brooks to be there with an AR-15, on a campus full of children, despite the fact that Brooks is not law enforcement, and has a history of PTSD-related issues that played a part in his termination from the fire department?

And if someone did ask Brooks to be there that day, who was it? Should they not themselves face discipline? Had this happened before? Is the city’s insurance company aware that this happens? Who knows about this, and are they trying to cover it up?

Very often, the cover-up is just as bad or worse than the crime.

Additionally, Brooks appeared to point his weapon in the direction of at least one person outside the building that day, as seen in the pics above. Did he do the same inside, as Dr. Steele says the superintendent told him? Is there video of it from inside the building? What would have happened if God forbid Brooks had shot someone?

We also emailed some questions to D.A. Cooper, and will update this post if he responds.

After the reports that Johnson City Police were possibly taking bribes to cover for serial rapist Sean Williams, another question we have is: Who is policing the police in Tennessee?

With our state having just passed a bill to potentially allow teachers to carry weapons inside schools, this incident also brings up a lot of questions about whether or not more weapons inside these building actually makes our children safer.

More questions than answers. But getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular incident would likely go a long way towards keeping our kids safer in school, and making sure nothing like it happens again.

Tennessee’s Constitution, 1840 TN Supreme Court Decision Show 2A Not Unlimited

/in , , /by

In August, Governor Lee is exercising his constitutional right to call for Tennessee’s legislature to come together in Nashville for an “extraordinary” session on “public safety” in the wake of the tragic attack at the Covenant School down the road that took the lives of innocent people, including children.

Lee’s press release about the special session did not include the word “guns”, but many are hopeful the discussion will revolve around some version of common sense gun reform, which even Fox News polls show are supported by the overwhelming majority of the people.

Predictably, pro-gun groups are already attacking Governor Lee for the implication that he will support some sort of “Extreme Risk Protection Order” that seeks to keep guns from dangerous people, saying he is betraying their constitutional rights as outlined by the 2nd Amendment. But 19 states already have these laws, including Florida which passed theirs after Parkland, and thus far they have withstood legal challenges.

The questions at the center of this special session will likely be a familiar one, one which we have been debating for many years: How unlimited is the 2nd Amendment really, and what was its true intention? To answer these questions about our nation’s constitution, our state’s constitution, and our Supreme Court’s interpretation of it, may provide the answers.

First, let’s remember what the 2nd Amendment actually says:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

2nd Amendment absolutists focus on that last part: “Shall not be infringed”, and say that overwrites the rest of it, even though it begins with “well regulated“, which those in favor of common sense gun reforms say would allow lawmakers to place limitations on the owning and carrying of weapons.

Even conservative Justice Scalia interpreted this right as not unlimited.

Former Tennessee House Republican Rep. Brandon Ogles highlighted the “well-regulated” part in committee, drawing ire from his own party.

Another key word to notice there is “Militia”, which many believe means the 2nd Amendment was actually the framers way of making sure the public was able to take up arms against a tyrannical government should the need arise, and not them saying everyone should be walking around armed to the teeth.

Standing here in the year 2023, over 200 years removed from the writing of the constitution, it’s hard to know exactly what they meant. But you know who was a lot closer to it, and in a much better position to understand the intentions of the United States constitution than we are?

The framers of our own Tennessee state constitution.

Article 1, Section 26 of the constitution can provide some clues as to which reading of the 2nd Amendment is closer to the framers’ intentions. It states:

“That the citizens of this state have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.”

Did you catch that 2nd part? Again: “The legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms to prevent crime.”

The first constitution of our state was adopted in 1796, meaning those who wrote it were contemporaries of the framers of our nation’s constitution, and likely had a pretty good idea of what they meant.

So if they believe the legislature can regulate guns, how can we stand here 227 years later and say they can’t? That seems to be a highly unreasonable position to take.

It’s also worth noting that when Governor Lee and others say that we can’t regulate guns because criminals don’t obey the law, as he said to us after Uvalde, he is speaking in direct opposition to the very words in the state constitution he has sworn to uphold.

Now let’s focus on the first part. Just like in the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution, which very clearly says it’s talking about a “Militia”, the Tennessee Constitution’s provision says “for their common defense”. What did they mean by that?

Again, here in 2023 it’s hard to say. But we can draw our answer from the Tennessee Supreme Court in 1840, which was asked to interpret this as it weighed in on a case involving a man who had been arrested for carrying a bowie knife in “Aymette V. State”.

The decision upheld the case against Aymette, who was arguing that Article 1, Section 26 allowed him to carry a bowie knife. In the ruling the Supreme Court made it clear that although he was “insisting” the law “gives every (white, at the time) man the right to arm himself in any manner however dangerous or unusual the weapon” – it went on to say the law did not do that.

Instead, the ruling makes it clear it the Supreme Court believes the phrase “common defense” is key to understanding the law, in that it was really intended to make sure the public could defend itself against a tyrannical government should the need arise again, and that it did not mean individuals could walk around with weapons “efficient only in the hands of the robber and the assassin”, because “these weapons would be useless in war, could not be employed advantageously in common defense.

“The right to keep and bear them is not, therefore, secured by the constitution.”

The ruling goes on to again say that the words “bear arms” are a specific reference to their military use – again useful for our understanding of the 2nd amendment itself – “and were not employed to mean wearing them about the person as part of the dress”.

Not only does the Supreme Court say the legislature can make laws with regard to weapons, it goes so far as to call it “absurd” to think they would not be able to do so, and that the right to weapons in situations of “common defense” would be extended weapons in non-military situations, knowing that “in the hands of an assassin, they might take away life.”

So yes, the Tennessee Supreme Court goes on to say, the Legislature has a right to “prohibit the wearing or keeping weapons dangerous to the peace and safety of the citizens, which are not used in civilized warfare, or would not contribute to to the common defense.

Addressing the argument that the Legislature cannot make these laws, the Supreme Court says it would be to “pervert a great political right to the worst of purposes, and make it a “social evil of infinitely greater extent than abandoning the right itself entirely.”

They go on to imagine “ruffians” entering a “theater” or “church” to the “terror of the audience”, saying it could become “habitual” – which, of course, it has – and say that it would “surely not” be beyond the power of the Legislature to pass laws to stop these horrors.

Prescient, no?

In summation, the Tennessee Supreme Court declares “the right to bear arms is not of that unqualified character” – meaning not without limitations – again reiterating that the law’s intention was of a “common defense” or military nature.

It’s worth noting that the argument of 2nd Amendment absolutists is often that even if it is in reference to a “militia” or the “common defense”, that that includes all citizens. But if they’re going to concede the 2nd Amendment is in reference to the “militia”, that word in the United States constitution is preceded by “well-regulated”.

They cannot have it both ways.

Again, the framers of the Tennessee constitution were alive in 1796. They were contemporaries of the men who wrote the United States constitution itself. Article 1 Section 26 very clearly gives the Legislature the power to make laws limiting the right to carry and keep weapons, and the Tennessee Supreme Court upheld that power in 1840 in Aymette V. State.

Today’s legislators cannot hide behind the constitution. They DO have the power to change our gun laws to keep us and our children safe.

The August special session will be here soon, called by their own Republican governor. It is way past time for them to do it.

“IS THIS MEMORIAL FOR DEAD CHILDREN GOING IN THE GARBAGE?”

/in , , , /by

10 minutes after the vigil outside Governor Lee’s office, he had the memorial for #Uvalde & #Buffalo victims removed, along with a letter signed by dozens of clergy. Unconscionable.

OP-ED: Gov. Lee, VETO PERMITLESS CARRY to Prevent Traumatized Youth Like Me

/in , , /by
Opinion by Christian Harrison of Clarksville

Growing up in the south, I got pretty used to guns. They were in the movies I watched, the games I played, and members of my family were not shy about their ownership. Honestly, I’d never feared guns before March 2nd, 2005. Mostly because I had been told they would be the only thing standing between me and a bad guy.

 

But on March 2nd, the bad guy was the one with the gun. On that day, my bus driver, Joyce Gregory, was murdered in front of me, my little brother, and 22 other students in grades from Kindergarten to Senior. It was a smaller county with one school and the bus driver had a lot on her hands, trying to deal with students of all ages. One day, she made the fatal mistake of giving a sophomore student a write-up for some form of smokeless tobacco.

 

I remember that. We were near the center of the small town square in Dover, TN. Mrs. Joyce was not happy, as she had previously gotten onto the students in the back for “dipping” on the bus. If I remember correctly, we pulled over on Main St. near where the Stewart County Clerk is now. She gave at least one student a write-up, which apparently got him in trouble with the school. I was 7 and didn’t care, because it seemed so small when the bigger kids were always getting in trouble for something.

 

It was either the next day or shortly after that I had gotten on the bus like every other day. Dew on the grass tickled my legs as I waited at some time near 5:45. Within 30 minutes we had pulled up to the house of Jason Clinard.

 

This is where my memory gets fuzzy. I remember pulling up to the gravel driveway where I heard Mrs. Joyce managed to get out “Good Morn-” and then it went fuzzy for about 20 seconds. I heard 3 gunshots and when I came out of hiding I looked around and didn’t see anything at first.

 

But what I did see has been burned into my brain. What’s amazing is that the shooter immediately ran and never saw what he did. He never saw what my brother and I had to see in front of us. At 7 years old I watched a woman’s life violently drain from her eyes, blood drip from her lips as she used the last of her strength to shut the door between the killer and us. As she slumped in her chair, she looked up in the mirror and I swear I saw the life leave her eyes. There has not been an instance of gun violence since where I haven’t been reminded of her face.

 

After Mrs. Joyce had passed on, her foot came off of the brake. The bus began rolling down a hill and was it not for one high schooler, we likely would have crashed into some woods in rural Stewart County. Luckily we hit a telephone pole and ran into an old couple’s house once we climbed out of the back of the bus. An hour or two later we were home safe, sound, and set up for a life of paranoia.

 

The kid had access to an unlocked nightstand where his father kept a .45. As someone who had clearly exhibited a history of mental health issues in a foster home environment, that gun should have been locked away from any children. Jason Clinard killed a woman because he was severely ill and had access to an unrestricted firearm.

 

I don’t like to tell this story, being so macabre. However, gun de-regulation, such as permitless carry, will only lead to new generations of traumatized youth like I was. Kids will continue to see people they look up to bleed and die until we get serious about gun reform. Who has to die at the hands of a mentally ill adult?

 

To Governor Bill Lee, I mainly just have questions. Do you think that mentally ill teenagers, convicted felons, and the mean-spirited should be allowed to carry guns anywhere they please? If the answer is yes, then I have one follow-up. Who do YOU have to watch die before you start caring about the lives and safety of the people in this great state?

–

Joyce Gregory was always so nice to all the kids. Stewart County was never that populated and she would help out with the local Boy Scouts. This woman was a grandmother, a wife, an aunt, and so important to so many people. She mattered, may she rest.

VIDEO: REP. FAISON Invokes MLK During Pro-Gun Rally Resolution

/in , , , /by

“Let’s not channel MLK, who was about nonviolence, in the same sentence as a rally for WEAPONS OF DEATH.”

Rep. Antonio Parkinson & Rep. Mitchell respond as GOP Caucus leader Jeremy Faison invokes MLK & calls AR-15’s “weapons of LIFE” as he honors Richmond’s anti-gun safety law rally.

Rep. Larry Miller was also booed, in a break from House decorum.

And Rep. Andy Holt outrageously wondered why we don’t see guns being a problem with 393 million of them in circulation in the USA.

First a Permitless Hog Farm, Now An AR-15 Giveaway – Is Rep. Holt’s Fundraiser “Door Prize” Legal?

/in , , , /by

Rep. Andy Holt (R-Dresden) is hosting a “Hogfest and Turkey Shoot” campaign fundraiser at his home this Saturday, and has announced he will be giving away an AR-15 Assault Rifle – the weapon used in tragedy after tragedy in America – as a “door prize”… but is it legal?

That Holt would give away a weapon that even NASCAR won’t feature in ads anymore despite the message it sends to those concerned about the gun death crisis in America should come as no surprise – he is after all the sponsor of a recent bill to weaken our permitting system in Tennessee to make it possible for people to get a permit to carry virtually anywhere in our state without ever actually firing one on a range, simply by taking a quick online class.

But is his giveaway actually legal? It would appear the answer is no.

The Secretary of State’s website is very clear: Raffles like the one described in Holt’s event – where people pay to get in, and are entered to win a prize – are considered gambling in Tennessee. While it may not be exactly like slots or poker which casinos such as this is story offer, the base mechanics are the same. Paying in an amount of money for the chance to get something back. Residents of Tenessee can go out of state to gamble, but inside the state, gambling is not permitted by any organization that isn’t a charity and hasn’t been pre-approved. Again, residents can perhaps use a site like Paybyphonebillcasino.uk as it operates outside the state but people within the State can’t set up gambling or gambling-adjacent options without risking the brunt of the law.

From the Secretary of State’s site:

Raffles and games of chance are considered gambling, which is prohibited in Tennessee. However, certain charitable organizations are allowed to apply to have one raffle, reverse raffle, cakewalk or cakewheel each year if that event is conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Tennessee Charitable Gaming Implementation Law. This is why many people would look to the speedy casino cashouts hosted online for their gambling fix instead of set institutions.

Only a qualified 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(19) organization that has submitted an application to the Division of Charitable Solicitations and Gaming and that has been approved by the Tennessee General Assembly can hold a raffle.

When asked about this on Twitter, Holt responded that the AR-15 was a “doorprize”:

But the SOS site makes no exception for such semantic arguments. What Holt describes in his event post is pretty clearly not allowed by law.

Again, from the SOS site:

No. An event is considered a raffle if someone must pay for a chance to win a prize and would be a violation of law. It does not matter that the payment is called a “donation.”

When asked if he had applied and been approved, Holt gave no answer.

There is even a question on the site itself about exceptions for political campaigns, to which the answer is very clearly also a resounding NO:

Are political candidates and campaigns allowed to conduct raffles or other games of chance?
No. The law only allows qualified 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(19) organizations to hold gaming events. Political candidates and campaigns for public office are not considered 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(19) tax exempt organizations… If someone is required to pay for a chance to win a prize, it is considered a raffle. Only qualified and approved 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(19) organizations may hold a raffle. It does not matter that the payment is called a “donation.”

As for the consequences, the site has this to say:

If the Division of Charitable Solicitations is notified of an unapproved event, the Division will notify the local district attorney general. Conducting an unapproved game of chance may be a violation of the criminal gaming statute, and local law enforcement has jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute the individuals responsible for the event… Please contact the district attorney for the county in which you believe the game of chance is taking place or contact the Division of Charitable Solicitations at (615) 741-2555 and the Division will notify the appropriate authorities.

In this case, the District Attorney to holler at would be Tommy Thomas: (731) 364-5513

And here’s how to holler at the Division of Charitable Donations: (615) 741-2555 & [email protected]

It’s worth pointing out that Holt is no stranger to breaking the law and doing things without a permit – he was previously found to be operating a pig farm without one.
He also recently mocked a Republican County commissioner who criticized disgraced former speaker Glen Casada, teasing him about beastiality (all class that Andy!) – and called a constituent who disagreed with him “mentally ill”.
We have heard from someone who was able to get Rep. Holt on the phone, who says she asked him if there is a way to register for the door prizes without buying a ticket for admission. Apparently Holt said he would get back to her, and hung up on her.
The charitable gaming office within the secretary of state’s office said they would look into it and get back to us, but when we followed up we were told all investigations are private until the investigations are closed, and that even whether or not there is an open investigation will not be disclosed to the public until after the investigation is closed.
Now you might be thinking – it’s just a raffle, who cares? And you’d have a point.
But the bigger point here is that laws exist for a reason, and laws that apply to the rest of us should apply equally to lawmakers themselves – otherwise we live in a two-tiered society, which is exactly the opposite of the “all men are created equal” principle.
Surely a “constitutional conservative” like Rep. Holt wouldn’t want to violate that bedrock principle just to give away an AR-15 and trigger some libs, would he?
As for the AR-15 itself, we’ll freely admit we find the idea of giving one away when they have been the source of so much heartbreak and misery feels irresponsible and heartless. We support the 2nd Amendment, but even Justice Scalia said it didn’t allow for “UNLIMITED” right to own and keep any weapon, anywhere, any time.
And even the maker of the AR-15 believed they shouldn’t be in civilian hands. The safety of our children should take precedence.

Instead of giving away AR-15’s at campaign fundraisers, it would be nice to see Holt working to make Tennessee a safer place, especially considering how unsafe a state we are when it comes to gun deaths, especially of women and children.
If you agree, or even just think laws should apply to lawmakers, Holler at Rep. Holt HERE – or on twitter HERE.

REP. FLEISCHMANN: “I Think There Are Enough Laws On The Books Dealing With Guns”

/in , , , /by

In an interview this week, Rep. Chuck Fleischmann made it clear he won’t back any common sense gun safety regulations as he spouted NRA talking points. Fleischmann has an A-rating from the NRA and as Ramsey Cohen says “Has taken thousands of dollars from them in the past”.

Watch and share the video below, and holler at Chuck HERE.

NEW: “I think there are enough laws on the books dealing with guns.”@RepChuck Fleischmann won’t support magazine size limits, universal background checks, etc. – instead spouts NRA talking points.

RELATED: Chuck has an A-rating from the NRA, as @ramseycohen points out here. pic.twitter.com/Xu2oQridsU

— The Tennessee Holler (@TheTNHoller) September 5, 2019

New TN GOP Caucus Chair Faison Downplays Gun Deaths, Misstates *Fact* About Guns (Again)

/in , , , /by

In a week in which America was yet again rocked by gun violence, newly minted Tennessee House Republican Party caucus chair Rep. Jeremy Faison has taken to Twitter to minimize the problem of gun deaths in America, using misstated facts to do it.

“Gun-related deaths are no where even close to the problem that liberals make them out to be,” Faison told a commenter:

Faison’s tweet came as a reply to a response to an earlier tweet where he had posted “pesky facts” above a post from @RealSaavedra, who listed other causes of death in America on a per day basis, including abortion, heart disease, cancer and more.

It’s a familiar talking point in anti-gun safety law conservative circles:

Faison keyed in on the “All Rifles” item at the bottom, which makes the point that only 1 American dies each day by rifle on average.

What this widely circulated statistic obviously and intentionally leaves out is all the deaths and shootings caused by non-rifles. In actuality, Every day, 100 Americans are killed with guns and hundreds more are shot and injured. Over 100,000 Americans are shot on average each year, far more than other countries – which means Faison turning the stat for “rifle deaths” into “gun-related deaths” in his follow-up tweet was either intentionally misleading, or yet another big mistake on Faison’s part.

It wouldn’t be the first flub from Faison in which he made up his own gun-related *fact* to help prove his ultimate point, which is apparently that that guns in America are really no big deal.

This past session Faison was on a committee that passed a gun permit-weakening bill which made it possible for Tennesseans to get a permit to carry a gun nearly everywhere in the state simply by taking a quick course online, without ever even having to fire one on a range. In addition to online courses, they could read blogs about such topics as 300 blk vs 5.56 NATO, which might be relevant for learning about the different types of ammo used for different guns, helping form a better understanding of gun use.

After fact-filled, emotional testimony from witnesses including Beth Joslin Roth of the Safe Tennessee Project, who demonstrated clearly that stronger gun laws do in fact save lives, Faison confidently informed Beth that despite all the numbers she presented to the contrary tighter gun laws don’t lead to fewer gun deaths – because if they did, the Bahamas wouldn’t have so many homicides, since according to Faison you can get the death penalty for illegally carrying a gun there.

As it turned out, we looked into it, and that *fact* was not true. Nobody has been put to death in the Bahamas in many years, and certainly not for having a gun.

Where had Jeremy heard this, you might ask? According to him, he heard it from a “Bohemian” he knew in college. (He meant Bahamian. Sigh.)

To his minimal credit, he apologized and retracted his *fact*. But for a man who sits on a committee that makes laws in Tennessee to be presenting false information that was so loosely sourced is a pretty devastating indictment not only of Faison, but of the level of accountability GOP Supermajority lawmakers are currently facing in Tennessee.

Inevitably, that permit-weakening law passed, and Faison has since been elected chair of the TN GOP caucus. But one thing hasn’t changed: Faison is still making up *facts* about guns to minimize a very real, very tragic problem, which makes all of us, and our children, much less safe.

Again, studies of the issue in general have shown repeatedly there is a relationship between stricter gun laws and a lower amount of guns, and gun deaths. Even Justice Scalia said you can support the 2nd Amendment while still supporting some common-sense gun safety laws. Moreover, more people need to understand gun safety and gun laws as it appears that not everyone does. For example, the gun laws for Wisconsin residents aren’t the same for Tennessee residents. Therefore people have to look up and understand those laws too, especially if they are planning on taking a gun out of their state. It is just one of the many factors one must consider before buying a gun, others being the intended use and if you are prepared to use them safely (more info here).

If you have a problem with state legislators putting out false information about serious issues like gun safety, then make sure they hear it. Holler at Faison HERE.

VIDEO: Nashville “GUN SENSE NOW” Rally

/in , , , , /by

On the steps of the Capitol, Tennesseans came together to call for action in the face of one American massacre after another.

Watch & share, and holler at your reps to #DOSOMETHING.

VIDEO: ARMING TEACHERS BILL HIGHLIGHTS (Heads to House & Senate Committees Wednesday)

/in , , , , /by

Last week HB 1380 – a bill from Ryan Williams (R-Cookeville) to allow teachers to arm themselves in Tennessee’s schools – passed out of the K-12 subcommittee, despite every single witness who testified making a case in opposition, including a teacher, a student, a former teacher, and 3 representatives from law enforcement.

Watch the Highlights:

The Senate version is SB1399 by Sen. Mike Bell (R-Riceville).

The two measures are scheduled to be heard on the same day this week: Wednesday, April 10th.

The bill, as amended, allows the carrying of loaded, concealed weapons by school employees with permits. The names of the employees would be kept confidential, though it appears neither the school nor the state would be held liable for any of the employee’s actions in relation to a shooting incident.

Law enforcement witnesses included Brink Fidler, a former Metro Nashville plainclothes officer, Sheriff John Fuson of Montgomery County, representing the Tennessee Sheriffs Association, and Colonel Dereck Stewart of the Tennessee Highway Patrol.

They all were concerned about training and allowing teachers to teach and law enforcement to handle those duties.Sheriff Fuson also pointed out the issue of responding officers differentiating between well-intentioned  school employees and an active shooter.

House Education Committee chair Rep. Mark White (R-Memphis) said he talked to authorities at a Kentucky school in the aftermath of a shooting there, who said arming teachers “would’ve been the worst thing they could to.”

Rep. Williams responded that Parkland’s authorities thought differently.

Rep. Iris Rudder (R-Winchester) felt it was a “discussion worth having” and helped it pass to full committee, while Rep. John Mark Windle (D-Livingston) asked why Tennessee wouldn’t pay for School Resource Officers everywhere with the $1 Billion surplus.

The bill is before the house and senate committees Wednesday. Holler at your reps.