Judge Revives Tennessee Gun Rights' Lawsuit

[mikegideon]

You may be right about the judge.

But if the case prevails I really don't care who brought it...

Hard to argue with that. I think it's safe to say that he will have strong forces against him. You would think the NRA would be all over it if it had any merit. It would be a huge lick on a national scale.

[LagerHead]

Hard to argue with that. I think it's safe to say that he will have strong forces against him. You would think the NRA would be all over it if it had any merit. It would be a huge lick on a national scale.

My guess they would have been if Lenny hadn't done things to get himself banned from just about every gun forum on the Internet. He is known nationwide among responsible gun owners as a kook. If he wins I'll enjoy the benefits, but I'll still think he's a kook.

[mikegideon]

My guess they would have been if Lenny hadn't done things to get himself banned from just about every gun forum on the Internet. He is known nationwide among responsible gun owners as a kook. If he wins I'll enjoy the benefits, but I'll still think he's a kook.

It just seems like a really big if. The NRA isn't the only one that would jump on this if it had merit.

[DRM]

Don't really get what you mean by that. Unless you mean the people that disagree with ol Lenny on actions, not necessarily principle.

I mean the fanboi's here bash on Kwik because they think it's the cool thing to do, 'cause all the "popular kids" are doing it.

[LagerHead]

I mean the fanboi's here bash on Kwik because they think it's the cool thing to do, 'cause all the "popular kids" are doing it.

That's not why I bash him. I bash him because to get your point across it is not necessary to go looking for confrontations with the police. He has done it on more than one occasion and rather than own up to the fact that he was trying to get a rise out of police while performing a technically perfectly legal activity, he tries to feign surprise. He's not honest about his motivations and denies that he was trying to be provocative. He gives you and me a bad name among both anti-gunners and those who hadn't really decided.

So call me a "fanboi" if you like. But the simple fact is I recognize an idiot when I see one.

[mikegideon]

That's not why I bash him. I bash him because to get your point across it is not necessary to go looking for confrontations with the police. He has done it on more than one occasion and rather than own up to the fact that he was trying to get a rise out of police while performing a technically perfectly legal activity, he tries to feign surprise. He's not honest about his motivations and denies that he was trying to be provocative. He gives you and me a bad name among both anti-gunners and those who hadn't really decided.

So call me a "fanboi" if you like. But the simple fact is I recognize an idiot when I see one.

+1

[mikegideon]

I mean the fanboi's here bash on Kwik because they think it's the cool thing to do, 'cause all the "popular kids" are doing it.

From another fanboi (and the greatest banning speech of all time)...

FL Permit in the News again, dude got shot 13x - Page 20

[JAB]

I still say that Kwik is a closeted (or not so closeted - or should that be 'kloseted') anti-gunner. His actions at Radnor Lake seemed designed to say, "Now that this dangerous law allowing carry in parks has been passed, even carrying this scary 'handgun' that many will see as an assault weapon (which I believe he intended, albeit one with the muzzle painted orange) is now legal. Legislators have put you and your kids in danger from nutjobs carrying 'dangerous' firearms when all you wanted was to have a pleasant day in the park."

His actions at Belle Meade seemed designed to say, "HCP holders are so confrontational that they will walk down your street with an unholstered weapon just to protest an archaic law that isn't even enforced."

Further, the whole lawsuit thing seems designed to keep drawing attention to those irresponsible stunts. Kwik is not on our side. At best, he is solely on his own side. At worst, he is actively working against us and the more I hear about what he has said/done, the more I believe that such is the case. I do not support Kwik nor do I support his lawsuit. His actions will not result in more freedom for anyone. The best outcome is that nothing will come of them. The worst outcome would be that he wins the lawsuit and, as a result, those stricken laws are replaced by harsher, more draconian (but carefully worded as to be Constitutional) laws. Basically, I expect the chances of there being any long term, positive outcomes for gun owners or HCP holders from the whole Kwik fiasco to be nil.

Edited February 23, 2011 by JAB

[DRM]

That's not why I bash him.

Then what I said does not apply to you.

[Punisher84]

I mean the fanboi's here bash on Kwik because they think it's the cool thing to do, 'cause all the "popular kids" are doing it.

Well I know you've been here sine 08, but since it seems you've only recently decided to become a mini-kwik yourself I'll remind you how many of us that post here actively had to put up with Lenny and his trolling antics. Dude is a douche. Plain and simple.

[E4 No More]

That's not why I bash him. I bash him because to get your point across it is not necessary to go looking for confrontations with the police. He has done it on more than one occasion and rather than own up to the fact that he was trying to get a rise out of police while performing a technically perfectly legal activity, he tries to feign surprise. He's not honest about his motivations and denies that he was trying to be provocative. He gives you and me a bad name among both anti-gunners and those who hadn't really decided.

So call me a "fanboi" if you like. But the simple fact is I recognize an idiot when I see one.

+1 well stated

[JayC]

Exactly how do the laws in TN get any worse? Other than doing away with the permit system all together?

I still say that Kwik is a closeted (or not so closeted - or should that be 'kloseted') anti-gunner. His actions at Radnor Lake seemed designed to say, "Now that this dangerous law allowing carry in parks has been passed, even carrying this scary 'handgun' that many will see as an assault weapon (which I believe he intended, albeit one with the muzzle painted orange) is now legal. Legislators have put you and your kids in danger from nutjobs carrying 'dangerous' firearms when all you wanted was to have a pleasant day in the park."

His actions at Belle Meade seemed designed to say, "HCP holders are so confrontational that they will walk down your street with an unholstered weapon just to protest an archaic law that isn't even enforced."

Further, the whole lawsuit thing seems designed to keep drawing attention to those irresponsible stunts. Kwik is not on our side. At best, he is solely on his own side. At worst, he is actively working against us and the more I hear about what he has said/done, the more I believe that such is the case. I do not support Kwik nor do I support his lawsuit. His actions will not result in more freedom for anyone. The best outcome is that nothing will come of them. The worst outcome would be that he wins the lawsuit and, as a result, those stricken laws are replaced by harsher, more draconian (but carefully worded as to be Constitutional) laws. Basically, I expect the chances of there being any long term, positive outcomes for gun owners or HCP holders from the whole Kwik fiasco to be nil.

[DRM]

Well I know you've been here sine 08, but since it seems you've only recently decided to become a mini-kwik yourself I'll remind you

You know, you're constant insults and tripping over yourself to reply to my posts has passed from amusing to mildly annoying. You clearly can't debate facts, so you result to this kind of childishness. Do us all a favor - think more, post less.

[DRM]

His actions will not result in more freedom for anyone.

This statement is 100% incorrect; a win in his case most assuredly gives us all more freedom.

[Guest HvyMtl]

Hmm. My 2 cents on Voldemort:

1) Forums: It seems he misses the point of what forums are. They are places where people ask for and receive information, place opinion, and read about topics they enjoy. They are not places to violate the rules, set by the owner of the forum. They are not places where you attack others, too much. They are not places to spout your agenda, particularly when counter to the forum's owner(s.) I do wonder if he is trying for the Guinness Book of World Records for the number of bans received from forums. He is the only person I know of who has been banned from a Puppy Forum.

2) Safety: Time and again, Kwik quickly points to the responsibility of others for their own safety, rather than taking the personal responsibility of carrying a loaded firearm. In spite of the fact his actions created risk for the general public, and the officers responding, he seems to believe the risk is the general public's and the officers' to deal with. IMHO, he really needs to take, and retake, firearm safety courses, and the carry Permit Class, at least until he understands the concept of handling a firearm with the public's safety as an actual concern. It is obvious and apparent the man cares not for the safety of others, and has stated so directly to my questions about safety on other forums (which he got banned from for Trolling.) So, I hate to say it, but his responses point towards the validity of Belle Meade PD's request, to suspend his permit as he was a safety threat... If I ever meet this man on the gun range, I am leaving, as I would not trust he would follow simple safety rules...

3) Changing the Law: Here and other places on the net, you will find Kwik's statements, where he does not care about the rights of others, and his belief that if a right is denied him, no other people shall have the right. Again, his statements were, he had NO CARE for the rights of others. This should be disturbing, as when asked if he worried about negatively impacting the rights of others through his Pro Se Lawsuits, the thing he thought about was if others had supported him, then these negative impacts would not happen... So much for the idea he is a valiant fighter for rights...

Kwik actually does have an attorney. The attorney is working on Kwik's case against the Radnor Park Ranger. Note: Kwik is spending $ on an attorney for the case where he expects $. Kwik is not paying for an attorney on his other cases. And considering his Pro Se track record, I do not see him winning this case...

[JAB]

Exactly how do the laws in TN get any worse? Other than doing away with the permit system all together?

Seriously? TN laws certainly are not perfect but you could answer your own question just by looking back a couple of years. Let's see...

Undo the law allowing carry in state parks and local parks that don't rule against. Make national parks off limits while they are at it (national parks now have no rule against carry, themselves, but defer to the state in which they are located.) Use the fact that at least one moron has irresponsibly used the park carry law to cause a public nuisance and potentially endanger the public and law enforcement by carrying a rifle-based pistol in a public setting. Laws that are looser tend to have an underlying assumption, for lack of a better term, that the public to whom that law applies will use a bit of responsible judgment when acting within the parameters of said law. In absence of said responsible judgment, right or wrong, justification for stricter and less permissive laws are found.

Use the momentum from 'rolling back' that law to roll back other laws, such as carry where alcohol is served.

Use the fallout from Kwik's idiocy to halt the forward momentum of increasing legal carry that there has been in TN for the past couple of years and block current or upcoming legislation.

It would be sad if, after pushing to get the anti leaders and majority out of power in our state legislature, the antis were able to gain power and manipulate the whole process based on the actions of this one guy.

[LagerHead]

This statement is 100% incorrect; a win in his case most assuredly gives us all more freedom.

This is where I must claim a certain amount of ignorance. It was my understanding that Lenny's lawsuits were to get back his permit, sue against the Radnor rangers for detaining him, and against the city of Belle Meade for detaining him. Is there something else about which I am not aware that should he win will result in more freedom for me? Not a sarcastic question, I honestly don't know.

[Fallguy]

This is where I must claim a certain amount of ignorance. It was my understanding that Lenny's lawsuits were to get back his permit, sue against the Radnor rangers for detaining him, and against the city of Belle Meade for detaining him. Is there something else about which I am not aware that should he win will result in more freedom for me? Not a sarcastic question, I honestly don't know.

Yes...

The lawsuit that has been continued is challenging the constitutionality of T.C.A. 39-17-1307

He dropped his appeal to get his permit back a while ago.

[DRM]

Thanks, Fallguy.

Like I said - regardless of what a person thinks about Kwik - should he win his case we ALL get more freedoms (and less "fees" out of our pockets for the HCP process, to).

[LagerHead]

Yes...

The lawsuit that has been continued is challenging the constitutionality of T.C.A. 39-17-1307

He dropped his appeal to get his permit back a while ago.

So basically he's saying we shouldn't need a permit to carry? Well, I must say I agree with that. Of course it doesn't change my opinion of him. And I doubt he will be able to argue a strong enough case to win, but I was wrong once before. At least I think I was.

[DRM]

So basically he's saying we shouldn't need a permit to carry? Well, I must say I agree with that. Of course it doesn't change my opinion of him.

And agreeing with *this* position doesn't mean we have to agree with *him*... just glad to see another person who can manage to understand the difference

[mikegideon]

Thanks, Fallguy.

Like I said - regardless of what a person thinks about Kwik - should he win his case we ALL get more freedoms (and less "fees" out of our pockets for the HCP process, to).

Won't help me much because I travel to other states. It will help a lot of folks that can't scrape up the money for a permit. I have NO faith in Kwik's ability to argue it coherently in court. He can't even keep a membership on a gun board, any gun board. How do you think he is going to handle lawyers... good ones?

If this case doesn't get some help from a few professionals, Lenny will just get bounced outa there.

[JAB]

And agreeing with *this* position doesn't mean we have to agree with *him*... just glad to see another person who can manage to understand the difference

What some folks don't seem to be able to understand, however, is that Kwik is arguing against the need for a permit while simultaneously providing the court system and legislators with a prime example of why they should bend over backward to keep the permit system (and find some reason - however questionable - to explain why the permit system is 'constitutional'.) After all, if someone as irresponsble as Kwik can get a permit then just imagine the kind of nutjobs who would be legally carrying if there were no permit system*. In fact, he provides a pretty good example for those who would argue that it is too easy to qualify to legally carry a firearm in TN and that the requirements need to be more stringent.

*I am not arguing that position, necessarily, simply saying that Kwik provides a pretty damn good example for those who would argue that position to back up their argument.

I am simply not naive enough to believe that our modern courts decide such issues based solely on what the Constitution (be it state or federal) says in black and white. The courts and judges who are supposed to be guardians of those documents have used their position to grant themselves a lot of latitude and 'wiggle room' when 'interpreting' the Constitution (as opposed to simply reading the damned thing and upholding it.) Further, the court of public opinion holds weight with our legislators (for many of whom simply getting re-elected is the #1 consideration.) What Kwik represents is NOT a chance that a Constitutional right to carry in TN will be recognized. Instead, he represents an opportunity to set a precedent by the court ruling that the permit system in TN is Constitutional, thereby hurting the chances of anyone more responsible and more sympathetic than Kwik who might want to challenge the system in the future. In fact, I would not be surprised if that was the reason a judge decided to let Kwik's case proceed, after all - so that the courts could have the chance to rule that the permit system is Constitutional. With Kwik putting himself up as an example, it would be likely that the majority of the general public (even many gun owners and some HCP holders) would wholeheartedly support such a ruling. The unfortunate truth is that if the court makes a ruling and the public supports it, what the Constitution actually says/intends is moot.

Therefore, I do not believe that there is a snowball's chance in hell that anything Kwik does or has done will result in any benefit for other gun owners in TN. In fact, I see only the potential for harm. Again, therefore, I do not support Kwik nor do I support his lawsuit. I simply wish he would go away.

[DRM]

JAB, I just don't subscribe to that kind of defensive, "sky might be falling" outlook - never have, probably never will. Always worried you're going to lose the table scraps they let us have is admitting defeat right from the start... IMHO, of course.

[mikegideon]

JAB, I just don't subscribe to that kind of defensive, "sky might be falling" outlook - never have, probably never will. Always worried you're going to lose the table scraps they let us have is admitting defeat right from the start... IMHO, of course.

JAB is right. Kwik isn't going into a situation where all things are possible. Maybe you should start a thread on how many times some psychotic douchebag challenged the constitutionality of a law, acting as his own counsel, and won. He's gonna get his ass kicked. I think constitutional carry may come to this state some day. If it does, it won't be by way of a crusading nutcase.