JayC

Wouldn't matter if we did, free speech and all...  SCOTUS ruled over a decade ago you can't limit speech even speech in poor taste...  was in some case involving rafters and a state park somewhere here in the SE.    

People keep saying that...  but where is the proof?  TX DPS investigated after the fire and couldn't find any credible evidence of physical or sexual abuse...  There was a single former disgruntle woman who came forward claiming she was abused by Koresh as a child...  Kiri Jewell...   All of this is based off of her claims..  but not a single former member of the 'cult' can confirm anything she's claimed...  If he was beating babies for 40 minutes straight...  or having sex with 10 year old girls with the girls parents permission, don't you think 1 other person would have come forward in the last 20 years and confirmed it?    Lots of members of his church weren't living at the compound, weren't there during the raid, and left after the raid and before the fire...  not a single one has confirmed any of the abuse claims.    

This is the issue where we need the TFA or NRA to file suit against the TICS...  They're misinterpreting state law IMHO when they deny purchases for not disqualifying events just because they aren't aware of the disposition in the case.   Oh yeah and my normal rant on how TICS is unconstitutional to begin with and needs to be repealed :)

The event isn't that big...  We had a bigger event hit us back in April.   You'd need a much bigger event for auroras to be seen this far south.  Something on the order of 2 or 3 magnitudes greater.    

Wrong killings by the government, that would be the Ruby Ridge incident a year earlier.    

Ready for what?  If I was north of I-90 I might be a little concerned about seeing a power outage...  otherwise nothing to see here.  

While I agree with you it's almost never a good idea...     The truth is we are empowered by state law to make arrests in most crimes that a police officer can...  difference being in most cases for minor crimes we must witness the crime being committed, and we don't have qualified immunity...   But, if you happen upon a passed out drunk that broke into your house, and feel more comfortable nothing in TN law is stopping you from slapping some handcuff on him...   But, I agree common sense says keep your distance, and keep your gun on the possible threat until the police arrive and can help you out.    

Yes, blame Open Carry Texas..  not the Texas legislature that refuses to allow open carrying of handguns with a permit.  Or better yet the open carrying of handguns without a permit.   They're trying to make a point, they are trusted to walk around with a loaded rifle ready to go to war...  but accidentally uncover your pistol and you're a criminal.  

And that is incorrect unless the firearm is loaded, or ammo is within reach.   I'd recommend reading TCA 39-17-1307 and 1308, it's very helpful in getting rid of bad hearsay you've heard ;)  

Limited exceptions for estates of family members.  There are legal ways for you to inherit your grandfathers firearms even if he lived out of state without going through an FFL...  obviously state laws also apply.    

I'm curious how he is passing is POST mandated background check and not passing the HCP check?

The first MNPD stop, unless something comes out during discovery was a good Terry Stop...  but they let him go...  The second MNPD stop is going to have to proven some new RAS/PC occurred between stop 1 and stop 2...  but stop 2 went way beyond a basic terry stop.   To search a locked container, even if you know 100% that it contains illegal contraband, current case law is pretty strict...  My understanding is the only exigent circumstance that could apply is the public safety/emergency exception...  that would require MNPD to prove that even though they had complete control over the container, they needed to open it to save themselves or a third person...  but I don't see how that argument holds water since they had complete control of the case, and were only a couple of blocks from a judge who could issue a warrant...   Also, just because he had a rifle, what specific PC did they have the rifle was loaded?      

The search doesn't seem to be good per current case law...   First, even if there was a rifle in the case, what specific to that gun probable cause did they have to believe it was loaded?  Remember carrying an unloaded rifle without a case is perfectly legal...  You also have 39-17-1307f3 to contend with...  which says a person does not possess a firearm...  if the firearm is in a ... container that is securely locked and to which the respondent does not have the combination, keys or other means of normal access.  This includes specifically NFA items.   Now, lets say you could muster the probable cause, that just means you qualify for a warrant...  that doesn't give you permission to search...  for that you need a search warrant or an exigent circumstance to search...  they didn't have a warrant... and I don't see how they can claim a valid EC in this search...  Leonard was detained, they had custody of the locked container, and were mere blocks away from a court house full of judges to grant search warrants.   I think the search is the most likely problem in a 1983 lawsuit.    

First, folks are reading this opinion the wrong way...  The motion to dismiss seems to be the first motion this judge ruled on...  While the judge chooses to add a lot of color commentary to the opinion... none of that matters...  All that matters was he dismissed the case..  and that is a good thing.     Keep in mind a lot of other issues were not covered by this order...  They never considered a motion over the search of the locked container...  Over the probable cause on whether the rifle was loaded, and even if it was load was Leonard in violation of the law...  The specific probable cause to believe the silencer was illegal to begin with...     If he survives summary judgement of a 1983 lawsuit...  he's likely to have a field day with MNPD and TDOS as part of the discovery process...  What people knew and when did they know it will become a key point I suspect...  all sorts of interesting facts could come out that might embarrass those 2 departments.   He can show real damages this time, loss of his business, and loss of his job...     I see MNPD having some issues:   1.  The search was likely unconstitutional under current case law, locked case, they had control of it, and still ripped it open to get a look inside before having a warrant...  they're on record saying they did that to verify if the weapon was loaded or not...  I don't see how they fit into a valid exigent circumstance to perform the search...  If found to have been an unlawful search, the arrest is likely in question to begin with.   2. The contention that he was a threat...  We've all seen video tape of news reporters walking up to Leonard between the 2nd and 3rd stops that day...  and having significant conversation/interview with the news...  The police appear to have testified they were aware of this interaction and used that as an excuse to stop him a 3rd and final time...  Not sure how they're going to be able to reasonably say he was threaten when a news crew felt comfortable enough to approach him on a sidewalk, and have a 5+ minute chat with him...  I'm also curious what type of information maybe found during discovery...  if there is even a HINT that they stopped him a third time because he was talking to reporters...  that may open the department up to a bigger lawsuit.  I'm a little surprised that angle wasn't pushed even more during the testimony over the motion to dismiss, it seems the officer opened himself up to the line of questioning by mentioning the press as a reason for greater alarm.   3. The handing out of literature may well give rise to a possible prior restraint violation...    Leonard is an idiot...  he's IMHO not a very good lawsuit fisherman...    But at the end of the day it's likely that MNPD and possibly TDOS violated his rights that day...  the video and audio evidence in any civil case is going to make it hard for officers to prove he was a threat to them or anybody else...  he wasn't abusive to them, he was handing out 2nd amendment literature, and stated that was his intent for being dressed the way he was and carrying the rifle case...  Since TDOS clearly knew who he was at the 2nd stop...  and one can assume they knew he had a history of shall we say legally exercising his 2nd amendment rights...  it's going to be hard to prove everything after they became aware of that fact is going to be lawful...   IMHO he shouldn't have a problem finding a good attorney to take this case...  minimum it's got to be worth 50-100k and if they survive summary judgement at the federal level, it's likely to be worth over a million.

The real question...  Is he walking around downtown Nashville this weekend doing it again or not?   1983 federal lawsuit in 3... 2... 1...

SAF and GOA two organizations that deserve donations every year...  Every time I get a call from the NRA begging for money, I turn around and give to one of these 2 groups instead.

Parking lots bill only protects HCP holders...  parking lots posted per 39-17-1359 are still an issue for folks carrying under the car exception to 39-17-1307.  

That is via an FFL, not via a private sale.  

Under what law is it illegal for a 'legal buyer' to receive firearms from anybody?   All the state and federal laws I've ever seen involve selling firearms or possessing firearms...   ATF FAQ on the subject: http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-21.pdf  

Only big issue you need to worry about when buying (other than condition and function of the firearm) is to make sure it's not stolen...  Selling has a few more pitfalls you need to worry about...  but buying is pretty straight forward.     I'm happy to show my HCP and unless I know the person I'll ask for a bill of sale from them.

I'm in agreement with you...  M4's are just for fun more than for defense...  but those same rules prevent us from picking up SAW's and M2's, which would be a lot more fun... and have some valid defense uses ;)  

Do it today...  but instead of DVD's use youtube...  put together a team to record the video, ask some of those folks to donate time to a good cause...  then hit up local gun shops/gun shows to provide a link to the link with every firearm they sell.   You don't need a lot of money, you could produce that video for less than $2000, maybe a lot less.  

Where are the charges though?  Seems like a pretty clear case...  at least a couple of felonies under TN law I see... and I suspect MO law as well.  

I suspect it would more likely be the union...  because that is overtime pay being taken from one of their members.

Yeah it's worded strange...  If I get to Lebanon this week, I'll slip into the PD and see if I can get a copy of the arrest report.  I'm betting Jones was outside the vehicle at the time of the arrest...  but it will be interesting to see.