Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 47

Thread: Carrying Army/Navy Pistol in Hand...

  1. #1
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Carrying Army/Navy Pistol in Hand...

    Breyer in his dissenting opinion in MacDonald v. Chicago quotes 1879 Tenn Public Acts ch 186 section 1, uses this as an example of reasonable post 14th A ban, which banned carying, except the army/navy pistol in the hand.

    I wonder if he even cares that this was a Jim Crow law?

    Props to you KWIK, you were spot on with the Belle Meade thing!!!!!!

  2. #2
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    Breyer in his dissenting opinion in MacDonald v. Chicago quotes 1879 Tenn Public Acts ch 186 section 1, uses this as an example of reasonable post 14th A ban, which banned carying, except the army/navy pistol in the hand.

    I wonder if he even cares that this was a Jim Crow law?

    Props to you KWIK, you were spot on with the Belle Meade thing!!!!!!
    Props? For what?

  3. #3
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Props? For what?
    For getting out ahead of this issue. Breyer's argument falls when Kwik wins.

    This isn't about kwik, it never was. It is about the absurdity of some gun laws and Kwik's willingness to demonstrate that absurdity.

    It is now a very big issue because the dissenting opinion in MacDonald used it.

    If you fail to see the ramifications, of Kwiks gun in hand - hand gun, then perhaps a review is necessary.

    1. Kwik follows law and carries Army-Navy handgun in hand in Belle Meade, Tn.

    2. Tennessee revokes Kwik's permit for following the law (ArmyNavy handgun in hand.)

    3. Supreme Court dissenting opinion cites Tenn. Army NAvy handgun in hand as an example of a reasonable state law at time of 14A.

    You see, even when the anti gun judge uses a Jim Crow law to justify the regulation (dispicable though it is), it backfires on them, as Kwik follows that law and has his right to bear arms removed by the state. That, my friends, is irony.

    Again Mega props to you Kwik.

    Live Free or Die,

    Thundar

  4. #4
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    This isn't about kwik, it never was.
    Nope, it's all about money.


    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    2. Tennessee revokes Kwik's permit for following the law (ArmyNavy handgun in hand.)
    The permit revocation had little to do with this. Totality of circumstances sir, totality of circumstances.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    You see, even when the anti gun judge uses a Jim Crow law to justify the regulation (dispicable though it is), it backfires on them, as Kwik follows that law and has his right to bear arms removed by the state. That, my friends, is irony.
    There is no "right" to bear arms in TN. It is a state granted privilage...An easily revocable one.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by kingfish View Post
    Nope, it's all about money.



    The permit revocation had little to do with this. Totality of circumstances sir, totality of circumstances.


    There is no "right" to bear arms in TN. It is a state granted privilage...An easily revocable one.

    The right to bear arms is a civil right and always has been. The problem is it is not recognized as such. This is why I have a lawsuit challeging the constitutionality of my permit being revoked being reviewed as I type. I sued the State Attorney General and the Department of Safety last Month.

    My permit revokation had everything to do with retaliation, official oppression, official misconduct, ethics violations, and violations of my Federal and State civil rights. It had nothing to do with breaking any law.

  6. #6
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    ...This isn't about kwik, it never was. It is about the absurdity of some gun laws and Kwik's willingness to demonstrate that absurdity...

    Thundar
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    The right to bear arms is a civil right and always has been. The problem is it is not recognized as such. This is why I have a lawsuit challeging the constitutionality of my permit being revoked being reviewed as I type. I sued the State Attorney General and the Department of Safety last Month.

    My permit revokation had everything to do with retaliation, official oppression, official misconduct, ethics violations, and violations of my Federal and State civil rights. It had nothing to do with breaking any law.
    Sorry, it is all about Leonard - Leonard getting a payday through settlement of his nuisance lawsuits.

    He went looking for trouble. He went looking for confrontations with law enforcement. It is well documented by his own words.

    There is an interesting thread in the Michigan Forum about getting illegal local ordinances changed before an incident occurs... http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...cal-ordinances.... What a novel concept...

  7. #7
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by kingfish View Post
    Nope, it's all about money.



    The permit revocation had little to do with this. Totality of circumstances sir, totality of circumstances.


    There is no "right" to bear arms in TN. It is a state granted privilage...An easily revocable one.
    Actually that is now incorrect. It is a RIGHT as of yesterday. But you see you will only have use of that right as long as patriots like kwik assert that right.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Sorry, it is all about Leonard - Leonard getting a payday through settlement of his nuisance lawsuits.

    He went looking for trouble. He went looking for confrontations with law enforcement. It is well documented by his own words.

    There is an interesting thread in the Michigan Forum about getting illegal local ordinances changed before an incident occurs... http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...cal-ordinances.... What a novel concept...
    It seems Kwik is real good at that Russ. I suppose he put the words in Breyers hand as well?
    You don't like the methods of the activist, but look at the results. It is a very beautiful thing.

    This thread was about the mention in the SCOTUS opinions of Army/NAVY revolvers carried in the hand in Tennessee. You turn it into Kwik bashing. Quite a shame. It won't be long before we have another locked thread, though I am interested to see how that will work with the new provider.

    RussP - maybe you should do something FOR gun rights instead of bashing gun rights activists. Just a thought.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    Actually that is now incorrect. It is a RIGHT as of yesterday. But you see you will only have use of that right as long as patriots like kwik assert that right.
    Wow, awesome. I must have read the wrong decision. The one I read sent back a gun ban case (handguns in the home) to the lower court to be reconsidered. Can you link the correct one please? I missed the part where they addressed TN carry permits.


    YIPPEEE No more gun laws in TN...Everyone shred your permits (well, those that still have them anyway)...WOOHOO


    You do realize that the Kwik cases will have no impact on anything as he will take the first settlement offered right? None of his self caused "civil rights" cases will go anywhere.

  10. #10
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    Actually that is now incorrect. It is a RIGHT as of yesterday. But you see you will only have use of that right as long as patriots like kwik assert that right.
    What happened yesterday that changed Leonard's motivations, his planning, his history of behavior, his stated goals?

  11. #11
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    It seems Kwik is real good at that Russ.
    Which "that" is he good at?
    I suppose he put the words in Breyers hand as well?
    Okaaaaay...
    You don't like the methods of the activist, but look at the results. It is a very beautiful thing.
    What results might that be?
    This thread was about the mention in the SCOTUS opinions of Army/NAVY revolvers carried in the hand in Tennessee. You turn it into Kwik bashing. Quite a shame. It won't be long before we have another locked thread, though I am interested to see how that will work with the new provider.
    You interjected Leonard into the thread...
    RussP - maybe you should do something FOR gun rights instead of bashing gun rights activists. Just a thought.
    Thank you, I do my share promoting gun rights.
    Last edited by RussP; 06-29-2010 at 02:30 PM.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    I went to the Tennessee Legislative history Library and copied a bunch of the old laws for everyone's enjoyment.



    Last edited by kwikrnu; 06-29-2010 at 03:41 PM.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956



  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956



  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956





  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    I'd also like to point out that at the time the Second Amendment was thought to apply to the Federal Government and not the States. Therefore, Tennessee changed its Constitution to add that the Legislature could regulate with a view to prevent crime. These words are absent the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment also declares that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Now that the Second Amendment is incorporated is the Tennessee Constitution relating to firearms valid? It seems to me it is more restrictive than the Second Amendment.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    What happened yesterday that changed Leonard's motivations, his planning, his history of behavior, his stated goals?
    The dissenting opinion in MacDonald v. Chicago cited the Tennesee law about carrying an army/navy pistol in the hand. Quite an ironic moment. Would be great to see Brennan's response if Kwik's case got to that level.

  18. #18
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    The dissenting opinion in MacDonald v. Chicago cited the Tennesee law about carrying an army/navy pistol in the hand. Quite an ironic moment. Would be great to see Brennan's response if Kwik's case got to that level.
    I believe this may be the part you reference...

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf
    Moreover, four States largely banned the possession of all nonmilitary handguns during this period. See 1879 Tenn. Pub. Acts ch. 186, §1 (prohibiting citizens from carrying “publicly or privately, any . . . belt or pocket pistol, revolver, or any kind of pistol, except the army or navy pistol, usually used in warfare, which shall be car-ried openly in the hand”)
    Page 205 of the pdf file...page 26 of the dissenting opinion.

    There is an interesting part here, "...the army or navy pistol, usually used in warfare..." Now, at the time of the writting in the law, that would have been the cap & ball revolver, the firearm usually used in warfare. Is that still the pistol usually used in warfare by the army or navy? Isn't that the Beretta M9, or a Sig? To comply with the law, would one not be required to carry the comparable modern pistol used in warfare. Was Leonard actually violating the law by carrying an antique replica?

  19. #19
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    ...Quite an ironic moment. Would be great to see Brennan's response if Kwik's case got to that level.
    And you have how much confidence in that happening?

  20. #20
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    It is a damn good case

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    And you have how much confidence in that happening?
    Don't know what will happen. I think it will be settled quickly in Kwik's favor. He was following the law.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    Don't know what will happen. I think it will be settled quickly in Kwik's favor. He was following the law.
    If it is "settled quickly" then it will also likely mean no admission of wrongdoing will be admitted and it will go away quietly. Then he can start all over again and continue to escalate confrontations until someone gets hurt.

    How exactly does taking the first settlement offered and agreeing to no fault admission make Kwik a 2A hero? It will just make him a little money (which is all he was after from the start.)


    Now, what does this all have to do with the carrying of a PROPERLY HOLSTERED handgun in DAILY LIFE? (See forum rules)

  22. #22
    Regular Member Archangel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    OTP, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    patriots like kwik




    You must not have read many of his posts....

  23. #23
    Regular Member Archangel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    OTP, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    I went to the Tennessee Legislative history Library and copied a bunch of the old laws for everyone's enjoyment.
    I went to the Varsity and copied the menu for everyone's enjoyment.



    It's about as relevant....

  24. #24
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    You should re-read the forum rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post


    Now, what does this all have to do with the carrying of a PROPERLY HOLSTERED handgun in DAILY LIFE? (See forum rules)
    This falls squarely within the forum rules. If you don't like the topic then please go bash gun rights activists in some other thread.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Archangel View Post



    You must not have read many of his posts....
    We don't need you to post your family portraits in this thread.

    Hahahahahahaha
    Last edited by Thundar; 06-30-2010 at 03:15 PM. Reason: laughing

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •