I can tell you speak from the heart MCX. Unfortunately, to many people here, they probably don't care about your well directed and meaningful insight like they should.
There are so many things to glean from Leonards and other individuals interactions with law enforcement. It is my firm belief that the police have been forced to shift focus from law enforcement, to opinion or feelings enforcement. In fact, every argument that has been drummed up against Leonard is based on emotive response, and dramatic flair.
Once upon a time, an open carrier decided to open carry. This open carrier likely walked down main street America, and almost positively received responses from people about how silly or stupid he was for doing so.
"Yeah it may technically be legal, but it's stupid and attracts attention", is the likely outcry.
Gee, I have heard that one before.
There is also the argument that Leonard is being confrontational with Law Enforcement. Despite some of his comments, I am willing to make a bet I am feeling has pretty good odds.
I bet Leonard does not think all LEOs/LEAs are inept, etc.
To the accusation that Leonard has been "confrontational" or was "fishing for a lawsuit", I say this:
His rights as an American citizen allow him this absolute right! His government answers to him. Period!
Maybe his statement goes above and beyond simply wanting to change law. Maybe it goes above and beyond a simple lawsuit. Maybe not. Who cares?
Maybe you don't agree with him doing it. Who cares what you think? Not I.
The majority of people who have opposed his actions, have really done so in very poor taste, and almost all have been excessively arrogant and immature in response. Often the commentary has included personal attacks, name calling, or other attacks specifically meant to demean Leonard in some way.
Funny thing is, I recall very well being told by a forum member I have not seen for a long time on here, when Leonards activities at Radnor Lake was fresh news(on or about October of 2009), that he would surely be the next David Koresh, Ted Kaczynski, or Nidal Hasan. In fact, I was told that I would likewise be the next iteration of these individuals, for simply pointing out the gaping holes in the attacks on Leonard, and the horrible attacks on Leonard in general.
For those who are wondering:
--I don't know Leonard.
--He and I are not "boys".
--I do not hate law enforcement. I think the job they do is extremely important in this country!
I just know that as an American, I must stand by those who have proven themselves to not be dangerous, and acted in a completely law abiding manner.
This goes for the St. Johns, Kimberguys, and the gentleman up here in Vancouver, WA who may very well turn out to be the victim of stereotyping and profiling gun owners to prove some political point by people who may possibly have no integrity and want to push their own agendas.
It's incredible to me that people are trying so hard to paint the activities of the officers and rangers in Leonards case in some heavenly light, while trying to firmly affix halos to their heads, even after the well documented actions present in the reports provided.
We're all human beings. We all make mistakes. Law Enforcement cannot be perfect.
However, just as law enforcement is tasked with enforcing laws (again not "oddities, opinions, or feelings"!), and the ignorance of a law is inexcusable on behalf of the citizen, the same is absolutely demanded of our law enforcement, or should be.
Ya know, if the ranger had given Leonard a "piece of his mind" and stated how he felt about Leonard carrying an AK47 pistol in the park,..whatever. He is entitled to an opinion just like the rest of us. May his opinion count at the ballot box, just as it should for the rest of us. So long as he let Leonard go, just as he did when he initially stopped him, then so be it.
If Leonard had attempted to sue on these grounds, I would have told him, in my opinion, to pound sand.
Frankly, and not to sound like an intellectually superior being cast down from planet awesome, some of you need to really apply a lot more critical thinking to your thought process.
You need to sit and utilize abstract thought before flagrantly attacking another person. Which means to sit and observe the situation from the position of viewing all the facts, and come to as many conclusions as possible, then applying probability to the most likely conclusion weighing all factors and analyzing every different facet or fact and how it pertains to what you believe.
If you cannot do this on the fly, you may have a lot of self discovery to do, in my opinion.
I am sure the responses will be less than pleasant, and not very well sorted or thought out. More meaningless personal attacks are sure to be incoming, and I will be absolutely shocked if this thread can contain well articulated, insightful responses.
Using the process I described above, I rate the probability of flaming not being present in this thread as "very low".
C'est la vie