voldemort at it again

[mikegideon]

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.

 

I want to see this clown win a lawsuit with his long history, the obvious cop baiting, and the fact that his damages would be very minimal (unless he gets the Big Bob treatment).

[Guest 6.8 AR]

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.

If they would only stop at "anti-idiot", I would be happier, but they attach fines and incarceration to the ones we have,

which are way too many. Bring back the pillory to the courthouse lawn to the anti idiot types and I'd have to agree. :D

[JayC]

Umm, interstate transport isn't a factor here, because Leonard lives inside TN, he wasn't traveling between states.  Also, 39-17-1308 isn't applicable because it doesn't appear as if was charged under 39-17-1307, but was charged under 39-17-1302a5.

 

The only applicable law on defenses is 39-17-1302b and c.  They didn't charge him for the firearm, but rather a 'silencer' which was attached to the firearm.  We don't know if it really was a silencer, it could have been a muzzle break or flash hider...  We also don't know if it was an NFA silencer if Leonard legally owned it or not...  but the defense in question will likely revolve around 39-17-1302b7 quoted above.

 

 

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.

 

 

[2.ooohhh]

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

 When the headline reads-

"Man wanders downtown with AR-15 equipped with silencer"

instead of,

"Activist baits police into arresting him through noncooperation, ends up in jail." 

 

My point was that the news venues aren't pushing the "he's an idiot angle" which makes Leonard look bad, they are pushing the "Ar-15s are evil" angle which makes a perfectly legal inanimate object look bad as well as reflecting badly on those of us who own guns, at least in most of the public's eyes.

[2.ooohhh]

Umm, interstate transport isn't a factor here, because Leonard lives inside TN, he wasn't traveling between states.  Also, 39-17-1308 isn't applicable because it doesn't appear as if was charged under 39-17-1307, but was charged under 39-17-1302a5.

 

The only applicable law on defenses is 39-17-1302b and c.  They didn't charge him for the firearm, but rather a 'silencer' which was attached to the firearm.  We don't know if it really was a silencer, it could have been a muzzle break or flash hider...  We also don't know if it was an NFA silencer if Leonard legally owned it or not...  but the defense in question will likely revolve around 39-17-1302b7 quoted above.

Sure interstate transport laws may very well play into this, he didn't say a word to the police and all his attorney has to point out is that his client was just beginning a journey to Kentucky on foot. 

 

Would I believe it- no. . . could the state prove otherwise with the evidence they have from the arrest- not likely.

[Caster]

Kwik seems to be TGO's case of the clap. No matter what kind of shot this forum gets, it still has periodical outbreaks.

[mikegideon]

Kwik seems to be TGO's case of the clap. No matter what kind of shot this forum gets, it still has periodical outbreaks.

 

Herpes

[JayC]

I'm by far not super familiar with civil law...  but I'm not sure his previous lawsuits would even be admissible in a civil trial, it's likely they couldn't even bring in the fact his permit was revoked because he never had due process involving his permit.

 

I'm guessing but his damages might very well be high if through bail requirements he was forced to close down his FFL firearms business.  He clearly has been held overnight, and has out of pocket expenses...  Plus the emotional distress of being locked up for not committing a crime ;) 

 

Also, this case has a serious PC problem on the search...  I just don't see how you turn this search into a legal one... he may very well have a very good 4th amendment and 1st amendment 1983 case, but IANAL just a lay person.

 

I want to see this clown win a lawsuit with his long history, the obvious cop baiting, and the fact that his damages would be very minimal (unless he gets the Big Bob treatment).

 

[Wyldk2]

And there seems to be no cure to that.

 

I have been following the past instances of his idiocracy and have wondered what would it take to stop someone like him. He seems like an attention whore. If everybody ignored him, he might just fade away.

[JayC]

I guess technically they could make that argument :) but seeing as he was handing out flyers on the 2nd amendment when arrested, I'm not sure his lawyers would go that route ;)

 

He has a much simpler argument under 39-17-1302b7 all he has to do is show proof that the silencer (if it really was a silencer) was legally registered and the case will be dismissed...  

 

It does raise the question of why he had the silencer on there to begin with...  if he had just been carrying the firearm, I think they would have been forced to let him go.

 

Sure interstate transport laws may very well play into this, he didn't say a word to the police and all his attorney has to point out is that his client was just beginning a journey to Kentucky on foot. 

 

Would I believe it- no. . . could the state prove otherwise with the evidence they have from the arrest- not likely.

 

[Daniel]

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 :)

I dont think he is getting legal advice. You may recall that he acted as his own attorney on previous cases.

[MacGyver]

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.

There definitely is one...problem is that it's a more universal variant instead of the government specific kind.

 

One day this guy is going to reach down into his bag of luck and find it empty. 

 

And when that day comes, getting assigned "Ben Dover" as a cellmate is probably the best of all the outcomes he can hope for.

[TMF]

I dont think he is getting legal advice. You may recall that he acted as his own attorney on previous cases.

I'm sure he's spent the past year preparing for this by spending all his free time researching every law on the books regarding weapons possession.

Meanwhile, women everywhere are grateful that he is not a member of the dating pool. I am also thankful that he has no hope of spreading his vile genes to an heir and infecting another generation with his brand of lunacy.

[TMF]

There definitely is one...problem is that it's a more universal variant instead of the government specific kind.

One day this guy is going to reach down into his bag of luck and find it empty.

And when that day comes, getting assigned "Ben Dover" as a cellmate is probably the best of all the outcomes he can hope for.

If he keeps it up he's going to keep pushing the limits until someone mistakes him for an active shooter. Couldn't happen to a better guy.

[Oh Shoot]

I dont think he is getting legal advice. You may recall that he acted as his own attorney on previous cases.

 

Not on all. Has used Phillip Davidson for some, like appeal on Radnor Lake lawsuit -- same attorney mentioned in connection with this round.

 

- OS

[mikegideon]

I'm by far not super familiar with civil law...  but I'm not sure his previous lawsuits would even be admissible in a civil trial, it's likely they couldn't even bring in the fact his permit was revoked because he never had due process involving his permit.

 

I'm guessing but his damages might very well be high if through bail requirements he was forced to close down his FFL firearms business.  He clearly has been held overnight, and has out of pocket expenses...  Plus the emotional distress of being locked up for not committing a crime ;)

 

Also, this case has a serious PC problem on the search...  I just don't see how you turn this search into a legal one... he may very well have a very good 4th amendment and 1st amendment 1983 case, but IANAL just a lay person.

 

Look at it like this... liberal jury (likely) in Nashville judging an idiot dressed like Rambo. He's not gonna find much sympathy. His best chance would be gun owners. I wouldn't award him a penny, even if Big Bob scraped his face on the floor real good :)

[JAB]

However, regardless of his motives; his actions are idiotic and have done nothing good for the firearm community/those who value our right to arms. Whether they have any lasting negative repercussions on the pro-2A community or not is difficult to tell but I can't imagine anything positive that has come from scaring people and tying up police who have to respond to his stupidity.

 

Truly, based solely on reports of his actions past and present, I really believe that this guy is a raging anti-gunner.  Everything he has done seems to have been designed to call attention to extreme instances of technically legal firearms carry.  In other words, I think he is saying:

 

1.  It probably seems crazy to a lot of people - especially those unfamiliar with firearms - that someone could wear fatigues and legally carry a Drako (AK-47) pistol around a public lake but under the current law it is perfectly legal.  Most responsible gun owners would realize that, while legal, it probably isn't a very good idea.  Why, then, would someone do that unless the desire was to draw attention to the fact and foster a change to the law?

 

2   It likely seems odd to a lot of people - especially those unfamiliar with firearms - that the same person could walk around a neighborhood carrying a handgun in his hand but under the law it was perfectly legal (actually, required although that was an old law that was apparently no longer being enforced.)  Why, then, would someone do that unless the desire was to create concern that people can legally walk around armed in that or any, other neighborhood?

 

3.  It really seems not only overly confrontational but, in all honesty, detrimental to business for a person with an FFL who wishes to sell firearms to foster an intentionally adversarial relationship with LEO via statements on one's business website.  Sure, a person should be free to do business (or not) with whomever he or she pleases as long as that person's actions are legal but why would someone go to such lengths to alienate a large part of their potential customer base unless the desire was to portray 'firearms rights activists' as fringe-group trouble makers?  I am not always a super-supporter of LEO or their actions but still find his downright anti-LEO approach to be unnecessarily confrontational and a poor representation of legal firearms sales and service.  I think that is the image he wants to project.

 

So, again, I am very nearly 100% convinced that, far from being a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, this loser is an anti who is willing to take extreme action, maybe even willing to get shot, to tarnish the image of responsible gun owners and further an anti-gun agenda.  To me, it is much like the woman who is the subject of this thread:

 

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/66753-extreme-danger-brady-liberal-with-a-gun/?hl=%2Bliberal+%2Bwith+%2Bgun

 

Not carrying for self defense, etc. but to help 'prove' how 'lax' gun laws supposedly are and try to bring attention to said laws in order to get more strict gun control enacted.  Far from being our 'friend', I think he is knowingly and actively working against us and our firearms rights.

Edited July 30, 2013 by JAB

[RobertNashville]

Truly, based solely on reports of his actions past and present, I really believe that this guy is a raging anti-gunner.  Everything he has done seems to have been designed to call attention to extreme instances of technically legal firearms carry.  In other words, I think he is saying:

 

1.  It probably seems crazy to a lot of people - especially those unfamiliar with firearms - that someone could wear fatigues and legally carry a Drako (AK-47) pistol around a public lake but under the current law it is perfectly legal.  Most responsible gun owners would realize that, while legal, it probably isn't a very good idea.  Why, then, would someone do that unless the desire was to draw attention to the fact and foster a change to the law?

 

2   It likely seems odd to a lot of people - especially those unfamiliar with firearms - that the same person could walk around a neighborhood carrying a handgun in his hand but under the law it was perfectly legal (actually, required although that was an old law that was apparently no longer being enforced.)  Why, then, would someone do that unless the desire was to create concern that people can legally walk around armed in that or any, other neighborhood?

 

3.  It really seems not only overly confrontational but, in all honesty, detrimental to business for a person with an FFL who wishes to sell firearms to foster an intentionally adversarial relationship with LEO via statements on one's business website.  Sure, a person should be free to do business (or not) with whomever he or she pleases as long as that person's actions are legal but why would someone go to such lengths to alienate a large part of their potential customer base unless the desire was to portray 'firearms rights activists' as fringe-group trouble makers?

 

So, again, I am very nearly 100% convinced that - far from being a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, this loser is an anti who is willing to take extreme action, maybe even willing to get shot, to tarnish the image of responsible gun owners and further an anti-gun agenda.  To me, it is much like the woman who is the subject of this thread:

 

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/66753-extreme-danger-brady-liberal-with-a-gun/?hl=%2Bliberal+%2Bwith+%2Bgun

 

Not carrying for self defense, etc. but to help 'prove' how 'lax' gun laws supposedly are and try to bring attention to said laws in order to get more strict gun control enacted.  Far from being our 'friend', I think he is knowingly and actively working against us and our firearms rights.

I think you give this idiot far too much credit; although it wouldn't be measurable without a microscope I'd have at least a touch of respect for him/his motives if he actually were an anti-gun nut trying to erode ourability to carry...no...I believe he is just a news hound who like the attention and is hoping to score that one, big lawsuit to fund his retirement.

Edited July 30, 2013 by RobertNashville

[JAB]

I think you give this idiot far too much credit; although it wouldn't be measurable without a microscope I'd have at least a touch of respect for him/his motives if he actually were an anti-gun nut trying to erode or ability to carry...no...I believe he is just a news hound who like the attention and is hoping to score that one, big lawsuit to fund his retirement.

 

Could be.  At any rate, I don't think his actions are in any way intended to help further firearms or carry rights, even in a misguided sense.  Either he is actively and knowingly working against firearms rights or he simply wants attention and a payday and doesn't give a tinker's damn how much damage he does to firearms rights in his quest to get that attention and money.  Whichever the case, I do not for one second believe he is a firearms rights advocate.

[TripleDigitRide]

If he can prove that he can legally own the items in his possession, shouldn't the charges be dropped?

[JayC]

We're not even sure at this point is was a NFA item or not that he had...  for all we know it was a strange looking muzzle break/flash hider.  Seeing as he is a FFL with a SOT, if it was an NFA he likely has the paperwork to prove it was his.

 

I can't see this going very far, only way I can see this lasting more than a few days is if the DA makes it a condition of dismissing the charges that he agree not to file a lawsuit against the police department.

 

If he can prove that he can legally own the items in his possession, shouldn't the charges be dropped?

[RichardR]

I wonder what George Washington & Thomas Jefferson would think about some of the comments in this thread ...*sigh*

[TripleDigitRide]

I wonder what George Washington & Thomas Jefferson would think about some of the comments in this thread ...*sigh*

You don't think they'd be happy with the fact that we're content with turning rights into privileges?

[JAB]

I wonder what George Washington & Thomas Jefferson would think about some of the comments in this thread ...*sigh*

 

They would probably be combing over their writing and speeches, trying to figure out why some folks believe they would have encouraged citizens to act like dumbasses.

Edited July 30, 2013 by JAB

[Garufa]

Just a quick technical question...

 

Did he mummify the suspected rifle in kydex?  Kinda looks like it from the pics.