The Supreme Court of the United States incorporated the 2nd Amendment
 against the states through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment
 in the McDonald v. City of Chicago case in 2010. The Tennessee
 General Assembly, as a whole, has never recognized that the 2nd was 
made a Civil Right by that action. Let us look at the results of that 
failure.
The Supreme Court of the United States has mandated the method for 
which all issues related to the 2nd Amendment are to be viewed. Text, 
then history, in that order. 
This was put forth in Heller in 2008, reiterated in 2010 in McDonald and once again in Bruen in 2022. Links to these cases are included in the description below, I suggest reading them in their entirety.
Bruen
 specifies the test mandated is that IF the Second Amendment’s plain 
text covers a person’s conduct. The government must then justify its 
regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s 
historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court 
conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second 
Amendment’s “unqualified command.” If an issue before any court 
implicates the 2nd Amendment, immediately the burden shifts to the 
government to prove any infringement it has, or may place on the right 
to keep and bear arms must be justified by historical tradition. If no 
similar infringement can be found in the time period from 1791 till 
after the ratification of the 14th Amendment, it is invalid, 
unconstitutional and void.
Listing the types of weapons the Second Amendment protects, Bruen echoes Heller, McDonald, Caetano, and the Miller case from 1939 (Heller specifically grasp the point of Miller
 when it says quote”This holding [of Miller] is not only consistent 
with, but positively suggests, that the Second Amendment confers an 
individual right to keep and bear arms that ‘have some reasonable 
relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated 
militia” close quote and Heller from Blackstone, “the Second Amendment protects the possession and carrying of weapons that are ‘in common use at the time.’ Heller
 further says “The conception of the militia at the time of the Second 
Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of 
military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they 
possessed at home to militia duty.”
From the recent case James Miller v. Bonta (not to be confused with the 1939 case) in the United States District Court, Southern District of California, citing Buren, the Hon. Roger T. Benitez presiding, he says “Americans
 have an individual right to keep and bear firearms. The Second 
Amendment to the United States Constitution “guarantee[s] the individual
 right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”… “And the
 guarantee protects “the possession of weapons that are ‘in common use, 
or arms that are “typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful
 purposes.”…The American tradition is rich and deep in protecting a 
citizen’s enduring right to keep and bear common arms like rifles, 
shotguns, and pistols. The “assault weapon” prohibition has NO 
historical pedigree, and it is extreme.”
Quoting Judge Benitez 
further; “Americans today own 24.4 million modern rifles (AR-15 types) 
61% of AR 15 owners said when polled one reason they acquired their gun 
was for home defense. Heller quoted Blackstone saying “Self Defense it 
the true palladium of Liberty”. From the 2021 National Firearms Survey, 
it is noted that firearms are needed defensively approximately 1.67 
million times a year. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 
2013 estimated there to be between 500 thousand and 3 million defensive 
firearms uses per year in the US. Judge Benitez says; “Guns for 
self-defense are needed a lot because crime happens a lot.”
The United States Department of Justice reports that in the year 
2021, in the entire country 447 people were killed with rifles (of all 
types). With a population of 320 million people in the United States, 
rifles of any kind (including AR-15s) were used in homicides less than 
.01% of the time, meaning 99.99% of AR-15s were used for lawful 
purposes.
Bruen makes clear that, “To justify its regulation, the 
government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an 
important interest”. 
Tennessee being government, must show historical tradition to allow its infringements.
In the previously mentioned in the Caetano Supreme Court 
case from 2016, which resulted in a per curium opinion, (meaning there 
was little or no opposition to the ruling in the entire court), it was 
held “If Heller tells us anything, it is that firearms cannot 
be categorically prohibited just because they are dangerous.” The issue 
before the court was whether to allow the use of stun guns, and because 
200,000 units were in use at the time, the court ruled them to be 
lawful. That number is a benchmark then for “common use”. If there are 
24.4 million AR type rifles in the hands of the general public, that 
certainly is past the “common use” threshold.
The test that must be applied is dangerous AND unusual, not simply dangerous.
Heller specifically says the firearms that are protected by 
the 2nd are firearms “that are not dangerous AND unusual, and typically 
possessed by law abiding citizens for lawful purposes like 
self-defense.”
Legislators who recite only portions of SCOTUS rulings SHOULD read 
the whole paragraphs in their speeches. Cherry picking selected portions
 of text without giving the full implication is dishonest. Modern 
sporting rifles could just as well be called “home defense rifles” or 
“anti-crime guns.”
Tennessee is the ONLY state to enact a complete ban on the carry of 
all firearms in the period from 1791 to the early 1870s. Some states 
said you could not carry a firearm concealed, none but Tennessee made it
 a crime to carry any at all.
No other state denied its citizens that right, which per Heller, 
preexisted the founding of this Republic. These laws are still on our 
books today in Tennessee.  There ARE defenses against prosecution, 
exceptions and exemptions, BUT, the crime of carrying a loaded firearm 
with the intent to go armed in case of confrontation is still codified 
here.
The General Assembly and every person who receives a check from the 
taxpayer takes an oath to support the Constitution of this State, and of
 the United States, and since the Supreme Court of the US has placed the
 same chains on Tennessee that surround the Federal Government, “the 
right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” every one of them is
 held to that. It is time the legislators honor their oath and remove 
the unconstitutional strictures placed on the People by this state.
Quote for the day, from Miranda v. State, “When rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be NO rule making or legislation that would abrogate them.”