Is it legal to carry military-style pistols?

[Steelharp]

You can't walk around town with a loaded long gun though -- only a handgun.

- OS

Unless you're Kwik; then, you can't even carry a handgun.

[Guest EyeOfMidnight]

No worries on the AR style pistol, do not own one nor do any of my fellows, thought I could if I wanted, carry my 1911 AND my grown up AR as long as it did not have a round up the pipe, but, I am sure that if the constabulary in a small town saw that, it would really raise some hackles, legal or not. I would just as soon not have that conversation, so I will be packing only the pistol in case they find a reason to ask for I.D.

As the home town makes the majority of it's money from running a speed trap, I am sure to be cautious with respect to traffic laws.

I do wonder, is there some statute against having any weapon in a vehicle with a felon in attendance regardless of the possession of a legal permit by the weapon's owner?

I do recall the Supreme Court last year ruling in a case in which a legal gun owner shared a house with a felon. SCOTUS ruled that the legal gun owner was allowed to own his guns even though his roommate could not.

[Jonnin]

An update I saw on another forum claimed the PLR was in violation because it was a SBR. The picture provided with that did NOT have any mods to make it a SBR, so that was a judgement call by the DA or whoever.

I think that point could be defeated if the BAFT guy were to testify.

[DaveTN]

There is a warning about the PLR-16 incident on GOC. (AD #90134)

It names the Prosecutor and the owner.

People always want what they perceive as “illegal†or restricted; I guess the value of my PLR-16 just took a big jump in Sumner County.

[Steelharp]

There is a warning about the PLR-16 incident on GOC. (AD #90134)

Somehow, I find some contradicting hilarity in The Rabbi using the screen name "easter" on GOC.

[MikePapa1]

OK, I have to ask because obviously I'm stupid, what is GOC?

[Steelharp]

- Gun Owners Club! - A Place for Gun Enthusiasts

[MikePapa1]

Thanks, Mike, Mr. Embody writes an interesting post. I understand Mr. Embody called General Lamberth about this case and, basically, seeking legal advice. The General gave me a bit more information on Mr. Sales' case. Apparently, there were two weapons in the vehicle together with the four occupants. Tha Kel-Tec was in the center console and there was a Bulldog revolver in the backseat. Mr. Sales claimed both of these weapons as his. Interestingly, there was also cocaine in the vehicle. The passenger in the front passenger seat was a multiple violent convicted felon who was within reach of the Kel-Tec. He had an outstanding warrant and was also charged with being in possession of the Kel-Tec. He made bond and disappeared. All of the occupants of the car admitted to being members of the same gang and all had gang tattoos. Mr. Sales denied any knowledge of cocaine, which was claimed by one of the rear seat passengers. Mr. Sales claimed the weapons and the other passenger denied knowledge of them.

Ultimately, the case was dismissed against Mr. Sales. For all of us who support our God-given right, enshrined in the Second Amendment, I'm not sure this is a case to fight. If you keep your pistol of this type within the reach of a multiple convicted felon with outstanding warrants in a car with cocaine, you might be arrested even if you have a permit. I remember my mother used to say something about dogs and fleas.

[Steelharp]

Wow, Randy; that's some great info. Sure sheds a much better light on the case.

Stupid is as stupid does...

[Oh Shoot]

Thanks, Mike, Mr. Embody writes an interesting post. I understand Mr. Embody called General Lamberth about this case and, basically, seeking legal advice....

Totally confused here. The link Dave mentions and comment thereupon by Steelharp, specifically:

You must be a member to continue!

(have to register to view)

Is by The Rabbi (Bill Bernstein, East Side Gun Store), yes? To whom the PLR-16 was sold by court order, yes?

How did Leonard Embody get involved here?

- OS

[MikePapa1]

I don't know about the Rabbi, but Mr. Embody called the DA to, in essence, ask if he would be arrested in Sumner County if he carried the 16 in H'ville. The General indicated that he couldn't offer him legal advice.

[Oh Shoot]

I don't know about the Rabbi, but Mr. Embody called the DA to, in essence, ask if he would be arrested in Sumner County if he carried the 16 in H'ville. The General indicated that he couldn't offer him legal advice.

Oh, okay, you seemed to be responding to the info Dave and Steelharp posted.

Kwik called since he lost his permit?

I mean, he could be arrested anywhere in TN for carrying any firearm since last summer.

Thanks,

- OS

[DaveTN]

The General indicated that he couldn't offer him legal advice.

This case stinks and that comment stinks.

In Illinois when you have a general question about the law we can call the States Attorney’s Office and they will try to answer it. What do you do in Tennessee hire a lawyer?

Maybe this isn’t the case to fight, but it appears to me that everyone from the cops to the prosecutors to the Judge are okay with sticking this guy with a charge they know isn’t a good one just because he is a gang banger. If they can justify doing that to him they would justify doing it to any of us.

Or maybe I’m basing my opinion on BS information from the World Wide Web.

[MikePapa1]

This case stinks and that comment stinks.

In Illinois when you have a general question about the law we can call the States Attorney’s Office and they will try to answer it. What do you do in Tennessee hire a lawyer?

Maybe this isn’t the case to fight, but it appears to me that everyone from the cops to the prosecutors to the Judge are okay with sticking this guy with a charge they know isn’t a good one just because he is a gang banger. If they can justify doing that to him they would justify doing it to any of us.

Or maybe I’m basing my opinion on BS information from the World Wide Web.

The question asked was whether he'd be arrested if he carried his Kel-Tec. I think the General didn't answer it because he couldn't give an answer. As a paid criminal defense attorney, even if he paid me, I wouldn't be able to truthfully answer that question, either.

A charge they knew wasn't a good one? An interesting statement. The General believes that the definitions in Tennessee statutes make it arguably a short barreled rifle. I disagree, but I see the argument. They shoot a rifle caliber cartridge, they accept rifle magazines. Does that make them a rifle? No, but arguing to Judges who don't know firearms, such as the General Sessions Judge nor the Criminal Court Judge in this case, I could easily make a convincing argument.

Also, initially, the police didn't know to whom the gun belonged. It was in a central location within easy reach of all the people in the car. Mr. Sales claimed it, as well as the Bulldog revolver found in the back seat with the other non HCP holders but denied possession of the cocaine also found there. I would submit to you, under those circumstances, I'm not sure I would have accepted it solely on Mr. Sales' word, despite his HCP.

As to whether it could happen to any of us, well you could be correct. I know both of the attorneys who represented Mr. Sales and was asked my opinion by both based upon the facts they presented to me. I'm not sure I would have handled the case exactly as they did, but I'm not critical of them either. The system, even flawed, worked. The charges against Mr. Sales were dismissed just as they should have been. I'll never suggest to you that either life or the criminal justice system is fair, neither are. My experience as an attorney tell me that guns, felons and drugs don't make a great mix if you are trying to convince the police that you are an honest law abiding citizen simply exercising your rights. I guess another way to look at it is if you do stupid things, bad things can result even if you are within your rights.

As to your last statement, ultimately, only you can decide that.

[DaveTN]

Remember when you were in law school and they were always talking about “Slippery Slopes†and then you got out in the real world and heard that term applied many times to situations that didn’t warrant it? Well this is the “slippery Slopeâ€.

I assume you are a defense attorney so I can see how you could nonchalantly throw around the “Life isn’t fair†statement or say that you could see their argument. Cops and Prosecutors are Officers of the Court; it is their duty to make sure innocent people don’t go to court. I can see how an arrest could be made in this case; I don’t see how it could end up in a courtroom. But I agree…. Life isn’t fair.

I’m a former cop; I don’t expect the DA to tell me if I will be arrested. I know from experience that you can be arrested for anything the cop chooses. But I damn sure expect him to tell me if I will be charged by his office.

[Steelharp]

FWIW, Rabbi tells me Kwik bought the firearm in question.

[Oh Shoot]

FWIW, Rabbi tells me Kwik bought the firearm in question.

You're really serious? If so, far out, in a rather twisted ironic way.

- OS

[Steelharp]

Serious. A story now owns a story.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Thanks, Mike, Mr. Embody writes an interesting post. I understand Mr. Embody called General Lamberth about this case and, basically, seeking legal advice. The General gave me a bit more information on Mr. Sales' case. Apparently, there were two weapons in the vehicle together with the four occupants. Tha Kel-Tec was in the center console and there was a Bulldog revolver in the backseat. Mr. Sales claimed both of these weapons as his. Interestingly, there was also cocaine in the vehicle. The passenger in the front passenger seat was a multiple violent convicted felon who was within reach of the Kel-Tec. He had an outstanding warrant and was also charged with being in possession of the Kel-Tec. He made bond and disappeared. All of the occupants of the car admitted to being members of the same gang and all had gang tattoos. Mr. Sales denied any knowledge of cocaine, which was claimed by one of the rear seat passengers. Mr. Sales claimed the weapons and the other passenger denied knowledge of them.

Ultimately, the case was dismissed against Mr. Sales. For all of us who support our God-given right, enshrined in the Second Amendment, I'm not sure this is a case to fight. If you keep your pistol of this type within the reach of a multiple convicted felon with outstanding warrants in a car with cocaine, you might be arrested even if you have a permit. I remember my mother used to say something about dogs and fleas.

Thanks for the extra details, MikePapa1

So was only one of the passengers a convicted felon, or were the two passengers in back convicted felons too?

Thought I had read that it is a violation for a convicted felon to be in "accessible range" of a firearm? Could they have made weapons charges on any and all felons in the car just for being that close to firearms, regardless of any culpability of the driver? It sounds like they did exactly that on one of the passengers. Was just curious about the other two guys. If they were felons but didn't get firearms charges just for "being in easy access" to a firearm?

With friends like that, the driver may not keep his HCP long-term. Unless maybe the passengers were relatives. One can't pick and choose one's relatives.

Am surprised that drugs in the car didn't backfire bad on the driver even if someone else claimed it? There are some counties down here around the state line that I'm pretty sure they would try as hard as they could to seize the car and sell it at auction to enhance the police dept budget.

Am surprised that just drugs in the car didn't make some kind of pretext for them to go after the fellow's HCP. But I don't understand much about law.

[Jonnin]

Thanks for the extra details, MikePapa1

So was only one of the passengers a convicted felon, or were the two passengers in back convicted felons too?

Thought I had read that it is a violation for a convicted felon to be in "accessible range" of a firearm? Could they have made weapons charges on any and all felons in the car just for being that close to firearms, regardless of any culpability of the driver? It sounds like they did exactly that on one of the passengers. Was just curious about the other two guys. If they were felons but didn't get firearms charges just for "being in easy access" to a firearm?

With friends like that, the driver may not keep his HCP long-term. Unless maybe the passengers were relatives. One can't pick and choose one's relatives.

Am surprised that drugs in the car didn't backfire bad on the driver even if someone else claimed it? There are some counties down here around the state line that I'm pretty sure they would try as hard as they could to seize the car and sell it at auction to enhance the police dept budget.

Am surprised that just drugs in the car didn't make some kind of pretext for them to go after the fellow's HCP. But I don't understand much about law.

I also had a chat with him, first rate guy. It was the one violent felon that caused the stir, the other passenger was hardly mentioned and the poor mr. sales got the brunt of the court and legal actions because the other guy skipped out. Since he didnt mention passenger #2 much, I assume that guy was just along for the ride, or didnt have any major history. There was more to the story, the violent guy claimed the other pistol initially but the driver said "no its mine" and the felon wisely shut up about it... but the officer took note of the comment.

Mr. Lambeth didnt go after this guy too hard on purpose: as a NRA guy he did not want a big trial over gun-rights and esp didnt want a jury to define what is or is not a handgun. They let him go because he didnt commit any crimes and to avoid the trial; he even told the guy when he made the deal it was fine if he bought it right back after selling it so if Mr. Sales had wanted his gun he could have kept it without incident.

The recommendation then was for TN residents to write to their state reps (tn govt guys not feds) to encourage a change in the law that defines a handgun as being fired by one hand, which is totally subject to opinion and can lead to a court battle. Better to have it well defined so zero argument is allowed over what is, and what is not, a handgun.

[Guest mds3d]

Quick question. Is the Tennessee law that a pistol is something that CAN be fired with one hand, CAN ONLY be fired with one hand, or is DESIGNED to be fired with only one hand?

Seems like that would make a difference...

[Jonnin]

The official text, if I hit the right pdf file:

“Handgun†means any firearm with a barrel length of less than twelve inches (12²) that is designed, made or adapted to be fired with one (1) hand;