voldemort at it again

[221 Fireball]

He, and the other open carry dumba$$ advocates who purposely stage it for a police response are doing us no favors. Laws give us privileges. Screw with the gray matter enough of any said law and someone will move to change it. Carry your gun, open or concealed, but quit looking for a fight with LE to become a news spectacle, because we all could lose in the end.

[Chucktshoes]

He, and the other open carry dumba$$ advocates who purposely stage it for a police response are doing us no favors. Laws give us privileges. Screw with the gray matter enough of any said law and someone will move to change it. Carry your gun, open or concealed, but quit looking for a fight with LE to become a news spectacle, because we all could lose in the end.

Agree or disagree with Voldemort, this is a terrible line of thinking. Laws do not give privileges, laws infringe on rights. The idea that we have to seek permission from the state to exercise natural rights is what got us into the sorry state we are in now.

[RobertNashville]

Agree or disagree with Voldemort, this is a terrible line of thinking. Laws do not give privileges, laws infringe on rights. The idea that we have to seek permission from the state to exercise natural rights is what got us into the sorry state we are in now.

Right now, in Tennessee we DO have to seek permission.  Carrying a loaded firearm on our person in public is a privilege under current law and we all need to remember that because if we don't remember that then we may do stupid things like this retard that gets the privilege further restricted.

 

I understand that the right to keep and bear arms is a RIGHT but in Tennessee; that right is not recognized; at least not really...it's going to take time and effort to restore the rights we are supposed to have but idiotic stunts such as those under the subject of this thread will NOT help us at best and likely only be to our detriment.

Edited July 30, 2013 by RobertNashville

[E4 No More]

His motives are money; his guise is fighting the good fight. I have no respect for that.

[Chucktshoes]

Right now, in Tennessee we DO have to seek permission. Carrying a loaded firearm on our person in public is a privilege under current law and we all need to remember that because if we don't remember that then we may do stupid things like this retard that gets the privilege further restricted.

I understand that the right to keep and bear arms is a RIGHT but in Tennessee; that right is not recognized; at least not really...it's going to take time and effort to restore the rights we are supposed to have but idiotic stunts such as those under the subject of this thread will NOT help us at best and likely only be to our detriment.

I don't disagree with anything you posted. I don't like Voldemort's shenanigans anymore than you do. My point is more about how we must have our thinking correct if we are to change the minds of others and make the changes we seek. How can we convince others to respect our natural rights if we don't think of them as such? TN treats gun rights as privileges because the people thought of them as privileges.

[TMF]

I don't disagree with anything you posted. I don't like Voldemort's shenanigans anymore than you do. My point is more about how we must have our thinking correct if we are to change the minds of others and make the changes we seek. How can we convince others to respect our natural rights if we don't think of them as such? TN treats gun rights as privileges because the people thought of them as privileges.

I don't disagree he should have the right to possess a rifle, and even carry it. Context is everything though. He was presenting the image of an active shooter. Body armor and rifle? You know as well as I do what he is trying to provoke. What he is doing is akin to walking around screaming "I have a bomb" then passing it off as free speech.

His motives have nothing to do with gun rights. The only reason he has attached himself to it is because it is the best way to get attention and money.

I don't know if he broke any laws, but I sure hope he did.

[mikegideon]

I don't disagree he should have the right to possess a rifle, and even carry it. Context is everything though. He was presenting the image of an active shooter. Body armor and rifle? You know as well as I do what he is trying to provoke. What he is doing is akin to walking around screaming "I have a bomb" then passing it off as free speech.

His motives have nothing to do with gun rights. The only reason he has attached himself to it is because it is the best way to get attention and money.

I don't know if he broke any laws, but I sure hope he did.

 

He doesn't break laws. I'm sure he researched it thoroughly before he pulled the stunt. I don't want to give him any credit, but going to his level of douchebaggery without even one ass whippin' really is some kind of achievement. I'm thinking that if the ass whippin' ever comes, it's gonna be a real good one.

Edited July 30, 2013 by mikegideon

[RobertNashville]

He doesn't break laws. I'm sure he researched it thoroughly before he pulled the stunt. I don't want to give him any credit, but going to his level of douchebaggery without even one ass whippin' really is some kind of achievement. I'm thinking that if the ass whippin' ever comes, it's gonna be a real good one.

IIRC this is the first time he's actually been arrested and charged with something (otherwise he wouldn't be facing a bond to get out of jail)...so...maybe he didn't research enough?

 

TMF had it right, his actions here is akin to the proverbial yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire - the right to "free speech" has limits; so does the right to keep and bear arms as does every other right; even the right to life.

[Chucktshoes]

I don't disagree he should have the right to possess a rifle, and even carry it. Context is everything though. He was presenting the image of an active shooter. Body armor and rifle? You know as well as I do what he is trying to provoke. What he is doing is akin to walking around screaming "I have a bomb" then passing it off as free speech.

His motives have nothing to do with gun rights. The only reason he has attached himself to it is because it is the best way to get attention and money.

I don't know if he broke any laws, but I sure hope he did.

I'm not even addressing Voldemort's attention whoredom anymore. I'm making a larger point that when we seek to reclaim the natural rights usurped by the government, we cannot do so as supplicants attempting to curry favor and privilege from our masters. We must demand that they respect the natural rights that belong to every human being. These aren't privileges they ever had the authority to grant or revoke. It is well past the time we remembered that. If we can't understand that in our own minds, there is no point even engaging in the fight in the first place as the war was lost before it ever began.

[2.ooohhh]

Honestly the sad part is that this shouldn't be news at all. A man legally carried a rifle downtown. NOT NEWS.

[mikegideon]

IIRC this is the first time he's actually been arrested and charged with something (otherwise he wouldn't be facing a bond to get out of jail)...so...maybe he didn't research enough?

 

TMF had it right, his actions here is akin to the proverbial yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire - the right to "free speech" has limits; so does the right to keep and bear arms as does every other right; even the right to life.

 

I missed that part! I hope they put him in a private cell with Big Bob. He needs some prison love in the worst way :)

Edited July 30, 2013 by mikegideon

[mikegideon]

I'm not even addressing Voldemort's attention whoredom anymore. I'm making a larger point that when we seek to reclaim the natural rights usurped by the government, we cannot do so as supplicants attempting to curry favor and privilege from our masters. We must demand that they respect the natural rights that belong to every human being. These aren't privileges they ever had the authority to grant or revoke. It is well past the time we remembered that. If we can't understand that in our own minds, there is no point even engaging in the fight in the first place as the war was lost before it ever began.

 

When we decide to do that, as a group, I suggest we pick a different leader. Voldemort ain't it.

[Chucktshoes]

When we decide to do that, as a group, I suggest we pick a different leader. Voldemort ain't it.

Agreed. He is a SME in douchebaggerness.

[TMF]

Honestly the sad part is that this shouldn't be news at all. A man legally carried a rifle downtown. NOT NEWS.

And I could go to the park playground full of kids and start screaming "I have a gun".

Since context doesn't seem to matter, that shouldn't be a problem. Maybe after that I can head on down to the old folks home and start screaming "you're all gonna die" all while I'm LEGALLY carrying my rifle. They are going to die eventually, so I don't understand why anyone would ever misconstrue that as a threat simply because I'm LEGALLY carrying my rifle. I guess anyone that thinks that is weird is just a freedom hating commie-nazi hoplophobe who doesn't believe in my rights to keep and bear arms.

[Oh Shoot]

If that was really a NFA can on it, what's the law on that? It's not actually a violation to not have paperwork on your person is it? Just makes your day a hassle until you can prove it if push comes to shove (which is right up K's alley of course).

 

- OS

Edited July 30, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[JayC]

He got arrested, so unlike all the times in the past where he was just detained, this time he has a possible 1983 lawsuit.  It seems he was handing out flyers when he was stopped, so he won't have to go the whole 2nd amendment angle this time.

 

It's very unlikely he broke the law, because either 1> the item in question was a flash hider not a silencer on the firearm, or 2> it was a silencer which Leonard has a FFL and SOT license for, which means he legally can own NFA suppressors.  Either way he's going to have an affirmative defense to the charges, if a DA will try and take it to court.

 

I'm shocked he made bail, I can only imagine the conditions of his bail are such that he couldn't continue to sell firearms as an FFL...  but then again that might be part of the 'trap' he's set for the police department so he can show real damages are part of the arrest.

 

I suspect he's going to challenge the PC on opening the locked case containing the firearm without a warrant, I just don't see how they can get to PC to open the locked case.  I can see the RAS for the terry stop, but once they noticed the case was locked, and he didn't consent to the search, I just don't see how they have PC at that exact minute to justify breaking into a locked container.  I think they'd need specific probable cause that the rifle he was carrying was loaded, or in someway was not being legally transported, and I just don't see them successfully making that argument in court.

 

As I said it seems to be a well crafted 1983 lawsuit trap...  just imagine what this guy could do if he's put that attention to detail, and logical thinking to use doing something constructive?  It's such a waste to go around trying to entice the police to do something wrong...  much easier and safer ways to make money.

 

IIRC this is the first time he's actually been arrested and charged with something (otherwise he wouldn't be facing a bond to get out of jail)...so...maybe he didn't research enough?

 

TMF had it right, his actions here is akin to the proverbial yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire - the right to "free speech" has limits; so does the right to keep and bear arms as does every other right; even the right to life.

Edited July 30, 2013 by JayC

[Pcdokk]

This "gentleman" is doing nothing but hurting the cause (our cause) by his attention seeking self centered behavior. I concur he needs a serious mental evaluation and mental health help. He's doing nothing but negatively impacting RESPONSIBLE gun owners with his outlandish behavior and attention getting stunts. Sad.

[Chucktshoes]

He got arrested, so unlike all the times in the past where he was just detained, this time he has a possible 1983 lawsuit. It seems he was handing out flyers when he was stopped, so he won't have to go the whole 2nd amendment angle this time.

It's very unlikely he broke the law, because either 1> the item in question was a flash hider not a silencer on the firearm, or 2> it was a silencer which Leonard has a FFL and SOT license for, which means he legally can own NFA suppressors. Either way he's going to have an affirmative defense to the charges, if a DA will try and take it to court.

I'm shocked he made bail, I can only imagine the conditions of his bail are such that he couldn't continue to sell firearms as an FFL... but then again that might be part of the 'trap' he's set for the police department so he can show real damages are part of the arrest.

I suspect he's going to challenge the PC on opening the locked case containing the firearm without a warrant, I just don't see how they can get to PC to open the locked case. I can see the RAS for the terry stop, but once they noticed the case was locked, and he didn't consent to the search, I just don't see how they have PC at that exact minute to justify breaking into a locked container. I think they'd need specific probable cause that the rifle he was carrying was loaded, or in someway was not being legally transported, and I just don't see them successfully making that argument in court.

As I said it seems to be a well crafted 1983 lawsuit trap... just imagine what this guy could do if he's put that attention to detail, and logical thinking to use doing something constructive? It's such a waste to go around trying to entice the police to do something wrong... much easier and safer ways to make money.

Disagree as I do with his actions, I do have to admit he has definitely gotten more sophisticated with his provocations.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If the cause is what we're after, please define how we conduct ourselves while taking the cause to another

level. Unfortunately, a civil society can only go so far, with all the propaganda being constantly spread about

firearms in our country. Like I said earlier, I don't care for the individual, one way or another, and I don't know

enough about him, nor have I met him, but there is something more to this and I suspect rather than ridiculing

him only, won't work out any more than just give some some instant gratification, or just pat themselves on the

back.

 

Otherwise, I suspect he could be an idiot. I just don't know.

 

The reason I ask how we take it to another level is that the level we are on is mighty shaky, considering all the

political correctness and emotion shoved down everyone's throats daily by the media and people like

Bloomberg. But that isn't the only problem we're facing. The big problem is every time one thing is being

challenged, and stopped, another, more sinister thing is being done without our attention being given, the way

politics is done is to use one hand to focus on while the other is doing something completely different.

 

Political correctness makes us make a fool out of someone, not that this is a good example, but it could be one.

 

You had better learn to know your enemy better than tuning in to the daily news.

[JayC]

The way 39-17-1302b7 is worded I'm not even sure under state law he has to retain paperwork for a silencer.  

 

 

 

Involved acquisition or possession of a sawed-off shotgun, sawed-off rifle, machine gun or firearm silencer that is validly registered to the person under federal law in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Records. A person who acquires or possesses a firearm registered as required by this subdivision (b)(7) shall retain proof of registration;

 

I don't think a 'firearm silencer' is a firearm under TN state law, so if I'm reading this correctly, it would need to be validly registered, but since it is not a 'firearm' it's not required that he retain proof of registration.  Now I'm sure that under federal law he must have that proof, but from the plain text reading of the law it doesn't appear proof of registration of 'firearm silencers' is required under state law.

 

Then again what exactly does retain mean, I doubt it means you must have it on your person at all times, nor does it mean you must produce it whenever requested by a police officer.  I can't find *any* case law on 39-17-1302b7 can anybody else?

 

And we're not even sure it was a NFA can that was attached to the firearm.

 

If that was really a NFA can on it, what's the law on that? It's not actually a violation to not have paperwork on your person is it? Just makes your day a hassle until you can prove it if push comes to shove (which is right up K's alley of course).

 

- OS

 

[2.ooohhh]

And I could go to the park playground full of kids and start screaming "I have a gun".

Since context doesn't seem to matter, that shouldn't be a problem. Maybe after that I can head on down to the old folks home and start screaming "you're all gonna die" all while I'm LEGALLY carrying my rifle. They are going to die eventually, so I don't understand why anyone would ever misconstrue that as a threat simply because I'm LEGALLY carrying my rifle. I guess anyone that thinks that is weird is just a freedom hating commie-nazi hoplophobe who doesn't believe in my rights to keep and bear arms.

 

Being a bad idea and being illegal are very different. I don't think what he did or what you suggest are good ideas, but that doesn't mean that they are newsworthy. Then again most of what is on the "news" since the networks went to a 24 hour news cycle isn't newsworthy either. "Man with a gun. . ." gets ratings, which ATM means that Leonard's behavior will be national news.

[TMF]

Being a bad idea and being illegal are very different. I don't think what he did or what you suggest are good ideas, but that doesn't mean that they are newsworthy. Then again most of what is on the "news" since the networks went to a 24 hour news cycle isn't newsworthy either. "Man with a gun. . ." gets ratings, which ATM means that Leonard's behavior will be national news.

If it wasn't newsworthy we wouldn't be talking about what an idiot he is.

[JayC]

Yeah the level of sophistication of this one appears very well thought out, much more thought out than his previous attempts, I'm curious if he's getting legal advice from somebody on how to pull this off....

 

I'm with you, I don't agree with his methods, but you can still look at something ugly and admire the effort it took to put it together :)

 

Disagree as I do with his actions, I do have to admit he has definitely gotten more sophisticated with his provocations.

 

[Guest Lester Weevils]

We have way too many laws and don't need any more, but sometimes it would be gratifying if there were some kind of anti-idiot legislation.

[2.ooohhh]

The way 39-17-1302b7 is worded I'm not even sure under state law he has to retain paperwork for a silencer.  

 

 

I don't think a 'firearm silencer' is a firearm under TN state law, so if I'm reading this correctly, it would need to be validly registered, but since it is not a 'firearm' it's not required that he retain proof of registration.  Now I'm sure that under federal law he must have that proof, but from the plain text reading of the law it doesn't appear proof of registration of 'firearm silencers' is required under state law.

 

Then again what exactly does retain mean, I doubt it means you must have it on your person at all times, nor does it mean you must produce it whenever requested by a police officer.  I can't find *any* case law on 39-17-1302b7 can anybody else?

 

And we're not even sure it was a NFA can that was attached to the firearm.

 

If he wast merely transporting it on foot he should have been legal.

 

18 USC § 926A - Interstate transportation of firearms-"the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container"

 

"Upon opening the AR-15 rifle, authorities found that it was not loaded; however, there was a wire lock preventing them from checking the chamber to see if a live round was inside."

 

18 USC § 926A - Interstate transportation of firearms-"any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible"

 

Last I checked he was still a dealer of NFA items which I would guess makes you legal to possess them while in transit. Since they had to both open and unlock the firearm to confirm that it was unloaded I would assume that it was not "readily accessible"  and was in what was effectively a "locked container"

 

 

TCA states under 39-17-1308 a

 

(a) It is a defense to the application of § 39-17-1307 if the possession or carrying was:

(1) Of an unloaded rifle, shotgun or handgun not concealed on or about the person

and the ammunition for the weapon was not in the immediate vicinity of the person or

weapon

 

It certainly wasn't concealed, and I've seen no mention whatsoever of ammunition near him or the weapon.