On item 15, federal law allows a person with a handgun or weapons permit to be exempt from the background check requirements if the permit satisfies certain specific conditions. Tennessee's does not and it should be an easy fix. The reason it has not been fixed is largely because it would probably reduce TBI's revenue from the TICS process and that it a "turf" issue.
On items 7 and 20, the 2007 changes to Tennessee's already existing castle doctrine were the result of individual(s) - including the NRA's then lobbyist - not understanding what existing TN law was and fully repealing it and substituting a law borrowed from another state that is worse that what we had in terms of how the legal presumption of justifiable force applied. Oddly enough, the prior NRA lobbyist understood this and worked with TFA to kill the exact same bill in the prior legislative session.
So, "one step forward" was the expansion of the doctrine, in theory, to include other locations such as cars, motels, tents, campers, etc. This was just an expansion of a presumption that says if someone "feloniously" comes into that area then the law would presume that there was imminent fear of death or serious bodily harm warranting the use of deadly force in self defense. It is a presumption
that applies in a criminal proceeding and can be rebutted (overcome) by the actual facts.
Two steps back? Many instances where we took two steps back including the elimination of some circumstances under which the doctrine would apply. One of these changes was a condition that the person relying on deadly force was not engaged in any illegal activity at the time. Note, the change is not "engaged in violent criminal activity" but "any" illegal activity. Thus, someone who is carjacked but who has expired tags, no insurance, an expired license or even going the wrong way on a one way street would be deprived of the presumption. These collateral circumstances have clearly nothing to do with the basic proposition of whether deadly force is warranted.
Here is a copy of the more detailed analysis that was prepared for the NRA's lobbyist in 2007 which was apparently ignored:http://www.tennesseefirearms.com/downlo ... sb0011.pdf