by Jacob Morgan » 1 Apr 2017 23:41
Regarding the Tennessee law, two points:
1) under 62-11-105(1) there is an exemption for An individual property owner or the owner's agent installing locks or assisting in a lock-out situation without compensation on the owner's property, public or private; I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but it seems to me that anything goes on one's own property. Among other things it would mean that an apartment owner could have their maintenance workers do locksmithing or lockouts, and ditto for large companies with in-house locksmiths--and it implies that one can posses the tools to do such work.
2) Again, I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but there is a gap in all the state laws I have seen, the Tennessee one included. A criminal statute lists if breaking a given law is a misdemeanor or felony and what class thereof. E.g., armed robbery is a class C felony, practicing law without a license is a class A misdemeanor, practicing medicine without a license is a class B felony. A class A misdemeanor means county jail up to one year and/or $2,500 fine, a class B felony is 8 to 60 years and up to a $25,000 fine, etc. Since the tool possession part of the Tennessee law does not state that it is a misdemeanor or a felony (and also not what class thereof), then it seems to indicate that it is not a criminal matter at all. While practicing medicine or law without a license carries both civil and criminal penalties, it appears that locksmith matters are strictly civil matters. Where the locksmith statue mentions civil suits it only has to do with engaging in the business without a license, there is no reference to suits (and the amounts of the fines, etc.) for tool possession. In my non-lawyer opinion the tool "rule" is therefore meaningless. It is just a pious throw-away line to make the legislators feel like they were doing something other than enabling an anti-competitive cartel to form. It was about limiting competition by only allowing new locksmiths to enter the trade if they were hired at the pleasure of established locksmiths. A board certified brain surgeon could show up in Tennessee and go into business for themselves. If I understand it correctly, Marc Tobias, John Falle, the staff from Lockmasters, et al, could not move to Tennessee and hire themselves out to so much as install a dead bolt lock on a little old lady's backdoor unless an already licensed locksmith hired them first. I.e., the licensed locksmiths collectively control who, and how many, new locksmiths come into the system. Someone is being protected alright, but it is not the consumers of the Volunteer State.
Lived in Tennessee for 11 years, and have a friend who is an attorney in Tennessee. Our families usually visit once a year or so. When I see him again I may show him the statute and ask him if the tool part of the rule has any teeth to it.
