Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 136

Thread: Look Who Made The News Again

  1. #1
    Administrator John Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bristol, VA
    Posts
    1,735

    Look Who Made The News Again

    Leonard Embody stirred up some trouble in Nashville, Tenn., by walking around town with a loaded AR-15 while wearing body armor. Police arrived on the scene after several complaints, but Embody was not interested in cooperating.

    http://www.opposingviews.com/i/socie...lice-questions

  2. #2
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Saw that....

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  3. #3
    Regular Member DocWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,968
    I see the taxpayers paying for a big settlement for these cops stupidity.

    I like all the "what if" comments. Ignorent sheeple that are scared of freedom.

  4. #4
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811
    Like it or not, kwirknu has a huge civil case building up now

    No legal reasonable suspicion to be searched, his property forcibly taken and probably damaged to check to see If the rifle was loaded, his suppressor, which was hidden from view by the case originally is what they charged him with, possession of a suppressor since he refused to turn over his tax documents for it over.
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  5. #5
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    I'm not so sure he has a case. While I don't like it, the way the law is written in TN it is illegal to posses a firearm, period. There are certain defenses to this charge, one is the weapon being unloaded, but of course there is only one way to know if the weapon is unloaded...check it. So if a LEO sees someone in possession of a firearm, he can assume the person is breaking the law until they defend themselves against the charge by showing they meet one of the defenses.

    That being said, it seems he was charged with having a prohibited weapon, [my guess is the silencer. T.C.A. 39-17-1302(a)(5)] and not the carry of the actual rifle.

    Guess we'll just have to see how it plays out.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  6. #6
    Regular Member DocWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallguy View Post
    "the way the law is written in TN it is illegal to posses a firearm, period."
    So TN isn't part of the United States and isn't covered by the US Constitution? Is that what your saying?

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallguy View Post
    I'm not so sure he has a case. While I don't like it, the way the law is written in TN it is illegal to posses a firearm, period. There are certain defenses to this charge, one is the weapon being unloaded, but of course there is only one way to know if the weapon is unloaded...check it. So if a LEO sees someone in possession of a firearm, he can assume the person is breaking the law until they defend themselves against the charge by showing they meet one of the defenses.
    Cite, please.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Johnson City, TN
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    Cite, please.
    Ok.

    TCA 39-17-1307

    "(a) (1) A person commits an offense who carries with the intent to go armed a firearm, a knife with a blade length exceeding four inches (4''), or a club."

    TCA 39-17-1308

    "(a) It is a defense to the application of § 39-17-1307 if the possession or carrying was:" [emphasis mine]
    "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
    "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin

  9. #9
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by DocWalker View Post
    So TN isn't part of the United States and isn't covered by the US Constitution? Is that what your saying?
    I'm saying that is what the law of TN is saying...

    I personally believe it violates the US and TN constitutions.

    Article 1, Sec 26 of TN Constitution say...

    "That the citizens of this state have a right to keep and to bear
    arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law,
    to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime."

    I'm not sure how making the mere possession a crime and you having to defend yourself against the charge is a right, but Leonard has already lost a separate court case challenging the law based on this...
    Last edited by Fallguy; 07-31-2013 at 04:23 PM.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  10. #10
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    Cite, please.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nascar24Glock View Post
    Ok.

    TCA 39-17-1307

    "(a) (1) A person commits an offense who carries with the intent to go armed a firearm, a knife with a blade length exceeding four inches (4''), or a club."

    TCA 39-17-1308

    "(a) It is a defense to the application of § 39-17-1307 if the possession or carrying was:" [emphasis mine]
    Which can be seen here http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/tncode/
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  11. #11
    Regular Member Baked on Grease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sterling, Va.
    Posts
    652

    Re: Look Who Made The News Again

    Quote Originally Posted by Fallguy View Post
    I'm not so sure he has a case. While I don't like it, the way the law is written in TN it is illegal to posses a firearm, period. There are certain defenses to this charge, one is the weapon being unloaded, but of course there is only one way to know if the weapon is unloaded...check it. So if a LEO sees someone in possession of a firearm, he can assume the person is breaking the law until they defend themselves against the charge by showing they meet one of the defenses.

    That being said, it seems he was charged with having a prohibited weapon, [my guess is the silencer. T.C.A. 39-17-1302(a)(5)] and not the carry of the actual rifle.

    Guess we'll just have to see how it plays out.
    It is also illegal to drive a car. One of the exceptions being properly licensed. So if the cops see someone driving he can assume they are breaking the law until they defend themselves agsinst the charge by showing they meet the defenses. Cops can pull over anyone on a whim right? Right?? I mean... it IS illegal to drive and it's your responsibility to prove you are doing it legally right?

    Yes, I am being sarcastic and facetious. The point is that the standard set forth [partly by a recent case, US vs Black I believe] is that if something is illegal but there is a path to do it legally the cops must assume the person is doing that way unless and until the cop can get RAS that he is in fact breaking the law.

    Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 2
    "A Right Un-exercised is a Right Lost"

    "According to the law, [openly carrying] in a vehicle is against the law if the weapon is concealed" -Flamethrower (think about it....)

    Carrying an XDm 9mm with Hornady Critical Defense hollowpoint. Soon to be carrying a Ruger along with it....

  12. #12
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by Baked on Grease View Post
    It is also illegal to drive a car. One of the exceptions being properly licensed. So if the cops see someone driving he can assume they are breaking the law until they defend themselves agsinst the charge by showing they meet the defenses. Cops can pull over anyone on a whim right? Right?? I mean... it IS illegal to drive and it's your responsibility to prove you are doing it legally right?

    Yes, I am being sarcastic and facetious. The point is that the standard set forth [partly by a recent case, US vs Black I believe] is that if something is illegal but there is a path to do it legally the cops must assume the person is doing that way unless and until the cop can get RAS that he is in fact breaking the law.

    Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 2
    Actually No, it is not illegal to drive a car in TN, it is illegal to drive one without an license though. I know it doesn't sound like much of a difference, but it is a big one as far as the law goes.

    In other words, there is no law in TN that says, "It is illegal to drive any means on conveyance on a public road in this state." and a separate law that says "It is a defense to (whatever the previous law might be) if a person has a Drivers license issued by this state.

    I understand what you are saying and don't 100% disagree, I am mainly going by what I have read and observed in the past as to what has happened in this state before.
    Last edited by Fallguy; 07-31-2013 at 04:59 PM.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  13. #13
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Here is a link to the actual warrant.

    https://www.facebook.com/download/31...%20warrant.pdf
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Champaign, IL
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by lil_freak_66 View Post
    Like it or not, kwirknu has a huge civil case building up now

    No legal reasonable suspicion to be searched, his property forcibly taken and probably damaged to check to see If the rifle was loaded, his suppressor, which was hidden from view by the case originally is what they charged him with, possession of a suppressor since he refused to turn over his tax documents for it over.


    It all comes down to the Reasonable Person Doctrine.

    Embody was epic fail in this stunt, as he is with EVERYTHING he does.

    I'm cheering for the day he missteps and loses his firearm rights. That day can't happen soon enough.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Johnson City, TN
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallguy View Post
    Actually No, it is not illegal to drive a car in TN, it is illegal to drive one without an license though. I know it doesn't sound like much of a difference, but it is a big one as far as the law goes.

    In other words, there is no law in TN that says, "It is illegal to drive any means on conveyance on a public road in this state." and a separate law that says "It is a defense to (whatever the previous law might be) if a person has a Drivers license issued by this state.

    I understand what you are saying and don't 100% disagree, I am mainly going by what I have read and observed in the past as to what has happened in this state before.
    Indeed. For that matter, the law goes even further than that. Having a gun in your own home is also one of the defenses, not the exceptions. So, let's say you voluntarily let an officer into your home; and he sees a gun there. He could in theory arrest you on the spot; and the prosecutor could in theory take it to trial and force you to bring in your house deed to show to the jury. If he didn't want to go that far, he could threaten to arrest you if you don't produce some sort of proof that you live there (say, a house deed or a driver's license with that address on it).

    Bottom line, Tennessee's law on weapons is very poorly written and open to abuse if a rogue sheriff and prosecutor ever decide to utilize it.
    "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
    "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin

  16. #16
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by Nascar24Glock View Post
    <snip>

    Bottom line, Tennessee's law on weapons is very poorly written and open to abuse if a rogue sheriff and prosecutor ever decide to utilize it.
    Totally. Which is why I agree with Leonard's goal (I think which is to change the law and/or have it ruled unconstitutional), just not always his methods.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallguy View Post
    Totally. Which is why I agree with Leonard's goal (I think which is to change the law and/or have it ruled unconstitutional), just not always his methods.
    +1 ... seems like he is not an idiot but a patriot ...

  18. #18
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by Nascar24Glock View Post
    Ok.

    TCA 39-17-1307

    "(a) (1) A person commits an offense who carries with the intent to go armed a firearm, a knife with a blade length exceeding four inches (4''), or a club."

    TCA 39-17-1308

    "(a) It is a defense to the application of § 39-17-1307 if the possession or carrying was:" [emphasis mine]
    Nothing here mentions a LOADED firearm. The law you have cited only mentions that it is illegal to go armed with a firearm. It says nothing about a loaded or unloaded firearm. Did you leave some of the statute off?

    Also, the defense section doesn't mention any of the defenses.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by templar223 View Post
    It all comes down to the Reasonable Person Doctrine.

    Embody was epic fail in this stunt, as he is with EVERYTHING he does.

    I'm cheering for the day he missteps and loses his firearm rights. That day can't happen soon enough.
    ??? Why would you actively desire someone lose their self-defense rights?

    I don't care for his tactics, either. But, I'm smart enough to recognize that he's in the right, harming no one, merely carrying self-defense items that have no business being prohibited or regulated. Nobody deserves to lose their rights over that.
    Last edited by Citizen; 08-01-2013 at 11:27 AM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I don't care for his tactics, either. But, I'm smart enough to recognize that he's in the right, harming no one, merely carrying self-defense items that have no business being prohibited or regulated. Nobody deserves to lose their rights over that.
    Exactly.

    Embody is definitely lawsuit-fishing (good for him, if they'll bite), but I think his other goal is to make precisely this point. People have become so used to this childish, spiteful tendency of banning actions we merely don't like, or disenfranchising those who engage in those activities.

    Let me be clear: there is nothing aggressive about what Embody has done. Therefore, to deprive him of his rights would be aggressive. Therefore, a poster has opined that a non-aggressive person should be aggressively stripped of their right to keep and bear arms. And in this forum of all places! For shame.
    Last edited by marshaul; 08-01-2013 at 11:36 AM.

  21. #21
    Regular Member DocWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,968
    If they say wearing a bullet proof vest and being armed is a cause for concern or is menising then I would like to ask all the LEO's out there do you go on patrol armed while wearing a vest?

    I know I was required to wear a vest while on duty and armed.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    God Bless Leonard

    Quote Originally Posted by John Pierce View Post
    Leonard Embody stirred up some trouble in Nashville, Tenn., by walking around town with a loaded AR-15 while wearing body armor. Police arrived on the scene after several complaints, but Embody was not interested in cooperating.

    http://www.opposingviews.com/i/socie...lice-questions
    He is certainly doing the Lord's work in Tennesse, standing up for the civil rights of all who live or trvel in Tennessee.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  23. #23
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    The warrant says they intentionally violated Leonard's 4th A rights.

    Is there a law against carrying a loaded weapon in TN?

    From the Warrant:

    At that point, officers had to make sure that he was not carrying a loaded
    weapon.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  24. #24
    Regular Member DocWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    The warrant says they intentionally violated Leonard's 4th A rights.

    Is there a law against carrying a loaded weapon in TN?

    From the Warrant:

    At that point, officers had to make sure that he was not carrying a loaded
    weapon.
    So can they stop all cars to make sure they have a DL?

    Can they come into peoples homes to see that they are not growing a pot farm?

    Sounds more like "Contempt of Cop" to me. They didn't like his attitude so they jacked him up.
    Last edited by DocWalker; 08-01-2013 at 05:47 PM. Reason: more

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Johnson City, TN
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by KYGlockster View Post
    Nothing here mentions a LOADED firearm. The law you have cited only mentions that it is illegal to go armed with a firearm. It says nothing about a loaded or unloaded firearm. Did you leave some of the statute off?

    Also, the defense section doesn't mention any of the defenses.
    It does not mention "loaded." However, it does mention "intent to go armed"; and one of the defenses is that the firearm was "unloaded" (as per the definition of TN law). As such and as I understand it, someone has the intent to go armed based on case law if they have a loaded firearm and if none of the exemptions under section 1307 or other defenses under section 1308 apply.

    And, yes, I did leave off some of the statute and the list of defenses since I didn't think it was relevant to the discussion. Here are those two sections in their entirety.

    TCA 39-17-1307

    (a) (1) A person commits an offense who carries with the intent to go armed a firearm, a knife with a blade length exceeding four inches (4''), or a club.

    (2) (A) The first violation of subdivision (a)(1) is a Class C misdemeanor, and, in addition to possible imprisonment as provided by law, may be punished by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500).

    (B) A second or subsequent violation of subdivision (a)(1) is a Class B misdemeanor.

    (C) A violation of subdivision (a)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor if the person's carrying of a handgun occurred at a place open to the public where one (1) or more persons were present.

    (b) (1) A person commits an offense who unlawfully possesses a firearm, as defined in § 39-11-106, and:

    (A) Has been convicted of a felony involving the use or attempted use of force, violence, or a deadly weapon; or

    (B) Has been convicted of a felony drug offense.

    (2) An offense under subdivision (b)(1)(A) is a Class C felony.

    (3) An offense under subdivision (b)(1)(B) is a Class D felony.

    (c) (1) A person commits an offense who possesses a handgun and has been convicted of a felony.

    (2) An offense under subdivision (c)(1) is a Class E felony.

    (d) (1) A person commits an offense who possesses a deadly weapon other than a firearm with the intent to employ it during the commission of, attempt to commit, or escape from a dangerous offense as defined in § 39-17-1324.

    (2) A person commits an offense who possesses any deadly weapon with the intent to employ it during the commission of, attempt to commit, or escape from any offense not defined as a dangerous offense by § 39-17-1324.

    (3) A violation of this subsection (d) is a Class E felony.

    (e) (1) It is an exception to the application of subsection (a) that a person authorized to carry a handgun pursuant to § 39-17-1351 is transporting a rifle or shotgun in or on a privately-owned motor vehicle and the rifle or shotgun does not have ammunition in the chamber. However, the person does not violate this section by inserting ammunition into the chamber if the ammunition is inserted for purposes of justifiable self-defense pursuant to § 39-11-611 or § 39-11-612.

    (2) It is an exception to the application of subsection (a) that a person who is not authorized to possess a handgun pursuant to § 39-17-1351 is transporting a rifle or shotgun in or on a privately-owned motor vehicle and the rifle or shotgun does not have ammunition in the chamber or cylinder, and no clip or magazine containing ammunition is inserted in the rifle or shotgun or is in close proximity to both the weapon and any person.

    (f) (1) A person commits an offense who possesses a firearm, as defined in § 39-11-106(a), and:

    (A) Has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921, and is still subject to the disabilities of such a conviction;

    (B) Is, at the time of the possession, subject to an order of protection that fully complies with 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8); or

    (C) Is prohibited from possessing a firearm under any other provision of state or federal law.

    (2) If the person is licensed as a federal firearms dealer or a responsible party under a federal firearms license, the determination of whether such an individual possesses firearms that constitute the business inventory under the federal license shall be determined based upon the applicable federal statutes or the rules, regulations and official letters, rulings and publications of the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives.

    (3) For purposes of this section, a person does not possess a firearm, including, but not limited to, firearms registered under the National Firearms Act, compiled in 26 U.S.C. § 5801 et seq., if the firearm is in a safe or similar container that is securely locked and to which the respondent does not have the combination, keys or other means of normal access.

    (4) A violation of subdivision (f)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor and each violation constitutes a separate offense.

    (5) If a violation of subdivision (f)(1) also constitutes a violation of § 36-3-625(h) or § 39-13-113(h), the respondent may be charged and convicted under any or all such sections.

    TCA 39-17-1308

    (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;

    (2) By a person authorized to possess or carry a firearm pursuant to § 39-17-1315 or § 39-17-1351;

    (3) At the person's:

    (A) Place of residence;

    (B) Place of business; or

    (C) Premises;

    (4) Incident to lawful hunting, trapping, fishing, camping, sport shooting or other lawful activity;

    (5) By a person possessing a rifle or shotgun while engaged in the lawful protection of livestock from predatory animals;

    (6) By a Tennessee valley authority officer who holds a valid commission from the commissioner of safety pursuant to this part while the officer is in the performance of the officer's official duties;

    (7) By a state, county or municipal judge or any federal judge or any federal or county magistrate;

    (8) By a person possessing a club or baton who holds a valid state security guard/officer registration card as a private security guard/officer, issued by the commissioner, and who also has certification that the officer has had training in the use of club or baton that is valid and issued by a person certified to give training in the use of clubs or batons;

    (9) By any person possessing a club or baton who holds a certificate that the person has had training in the use of a club or baton for self-defense that is valid and issued by a certified person authorized to give training in the use of clubs or batons, and is not prohibited from purchasing a firearm under any local, state or federal laws; or

    (10) By any out-of-state, full-time, commissioned law enforcement officer who holds a valid commission card from the appropriate out-of-state law enforcement agency and a photo identification; provided, that if no valid commission card and photo identification are retained, then it shall be unlawful for that officer to carry firearms in this state and the provisions of this section shall not apply. The defense provided by this subdivision (a)(10) shall only be applicable if the state where the out-of-state officer is employed has entered into a reciprocity agreement with this state that allows a full-time, commissioned law enforcement officer in Tennessee to lawfully carry or possess a weapon in the other state.

    (b) The defenses described in this section are not available to persons described in § 39-17-1307(b)(1).
    Last edited by Nascar24Glock; 08-01-2013 at 06:12 PM.
    "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
    "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •