Here are the cold hard facts that Kwik and his followers continue to ignore. Furthermore, the points that were made to begin with and how it's impossible to believe Kwik is doing all this for the greater good of gun rights.
(Now in Grassroots vision!)
1. Kwik, as of now, is labeled as a liar. He has been caught several times seemingly forgetting things he has posted in the past which in turn throw him for a "loop".
Cite.
First it was the post at tncivilcity, which he has STILL neither confirmed nor DENIED he authored. Thus (until he finally answers the question) catching him in a lie.
Omitting an answer is not the same as a lie. Your dramatic, effeminate attachment to what may or may not have been done, is duly noted.
(This is the same time his most infamous follower Slow stated he was done with Kwik and couldn't abide by a liar)
While simultaneously being shown that Kwik was banned from the vast majority of those forums prior to the edits taking place, hence meaning it is an admin or moderator edit.
How can you edit a post, or alter a post under a specific username, AFTER you have been banned?
Can you answer this? No. You are incapable of that.
Then Jadon comes along. Posts numerous well thought, researched points in reference to Kwiks actions and affiliation in areas which would cause anyone to say "hmm".
Numerous and "well thought out" because they agree with your point of view. Nothing more, nothing less.
An ALLEGED arrest is brought up.
Incorrect. Jadon makes commentary directly specifying that kwik has been charged with a crime in the past.
Jadon then refuses to post his "proof" of said accusation, because said proof is under lock and key in a personnel file that is outside of FOIA mandates:
Citation for proof -
5 U.S.C.§ 552(b)
(b)(6) EXEMPTION - Personal Information Affecting an Individual's Privacy
This exemption permits the government to withhold all information about individuals in "personnel and medical files and similar files" when the disclosure of such information " would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." This exemption cannot be invoked to withhold from a requester information pertaining to the requester.
(b)(7) EXEMPTION - Investigatory Records Compiled for Law Enforcement Purposes
As amended, this exemption protects from disclosure "records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes.
EXEMPTION 7(A) Records or information that could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. This exemption authorizes the withholding of "records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that production of such law enforcement records or information ... could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings."
EXEMPTION 7(B) Disclosure which would deprive a person of a fair trial or an impartial adjudication. Records that would prevents prejudicial pretrial publicity that could impair a court proceeding, protects "records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes [the disclosure of which] would deprive a person of the right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication."
Yet you cannot, and will not concede that this action is illegal, and egregious in nature.
Just like the majority of you evade the officers EXTREMELY DANGEROUS handling of an unfamiliar firearm during the Bell Meade encounter.
Kwik denies (and still denies) every being arrested.
He was never arrested.
He was charged with a crime, and the charge was dropped due to a severe lack of evidence on the prosecutions behalf. One does not have to be arrested to be subpoenad.
He even posted that he had his record sealed. The judge was not going to seal it using the same BS lack of following THE LAW that the officers in both cases have done. They were going to attempt to use a case of DROPPED CHARGES and UNSUBSTANTIATED claims to denigrate Leonards character.
The judge broke the law, and failed to perform his duty. Until Leonard followed up with the court administrator, and then the judge called him immediately back into session the next morning, apologized to Leonard for not performing his duty.
He then expunged the record, as he was required to do by law.
Want audio? It's on youtube.
Kwik in turn forces a law enforcement agency to determine a bolo is open record. In this bolo it mentions an arrest, bringing weight to the allegation.
Cite in accordance with site rules:
- (5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.
An old news broadcast (online) even mentions he was involved in a domestic incident where an order of protection was taken out, causing his permit to be suspended.
Ex Parte orders of protection that were later summarily dismissed due to excessive, overdramatic response and games on behalf of the complainant.
Leonard got ripped off in a business transaction for an item that was locked and unusable. The seller attempted very hard to state that the item was not for use on his Buick Roadmaster, when in fact IT WAS the EXACT MODEL of hypertech for his Buick.
That is cold hard fact.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out there might have been a domestic violence arrest to cause such action.
No it just takes wild supposition to assume an arrest was ever made. It takes even more denigration and absence of critical thought, to assume that all charges against any human being at any given time assure their criminality.
Kwik gets a perfect opportunity to question the validity of the bolo in a recorded meeting with the department, yet not ONCE does he ask where the information comes from. Why that was not the first and only question is mind boggling.
Why would you when the record was expunged?
Couldn't he spend his time more wisely on other topics?
You want him to bring up something that isn't even part of his case anymore?
Why would he do that?
Instead he argues that releasing such information is a crime (even though he is the person who forced it to be that way) and wishes to file a complaint.
There is no exception where it is "ok" to wantonly throw around a persons record, especially when it is expunged, and in direct defiance of the FOIA exceptions specified.
So Leonard argued correctly.
Here it is again, in case you think you know what you are talking about again:
(b)(6) EXEMPTION - Personal Information Affecting an Individual's Privacy
This exemption permits the government to withhold all information about individuals in "personnel and medical files and similar files" when the disclosure of such information " would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." This exemption cannot be invoked to withhold from a requester information pertaining to the requester.
(b)(7) EXEMPTION - Investigatory Records Compiled for Law Enforcement Purposes
As amended, this exemption protects from disclosure "records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes.
EXEMPTION 7(A) Records or information that could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. This exemption authorizes the withholding of "records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that production of such law enforcement records or information ... could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings."
EXEMPTION 7(B) Disclosure which would deprive a person of a fair trial or an impartial adjudication. Records that would prevents prejudicial pretrial publicity that could impair a court proceeding, protects "records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes [the disclosure of which] would deprive a person of the right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication."
EXEMPTION 7(C) Personal Information in Law Enforcement Records. This exemption provides protection for personal information in law enforcement records. This exemption is the law enforcement counterpart to Exemption 6, providing protection for law enforcement information the disclosure of which "could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."
Kwik is asked to cite the law where it states this is a crime and why it matters if the information is false.
Oh well good golly gee. The legality of the release of such information is so extremely difficult to look up on your own. :uhoh:
I know everyone is shocked, but of course... no answer. That being said, I will not sit here and believe he is here for the benefit of gun rights.
Then you have not seen his commentary in other sections of the forum. He very clearly believes that there should be no imposition of law that denies the keeping and bearing of arms as the Constitution specifies. That is to say, "Not Infringed".
He has never at any point made any egregious comment towards any open carrier on here as to their activity of open carrying.
2. Kwik has caused every single confrontation he has had with LEO's. The fact he plans such confrontation and in turn sues at the end, tells me this is nothing more than a way to make money. He even goes on TV and states he just wants to be left alone and that he is a PRIVATE person....lie.
He operates within the confines of the law, testing law enforcements response to completely legal activities. He may TRULY DESIRE to be left alone. His intent is obviously to invoke only responses that would validate the belief that most law enforcement officials care little for constitutional rights, and are ready to even violate the law to enforce mind crimes.
He has made a hell of a point to this end, as he is stopped repeatedly for legal activity.
3. Kwik has edited old posts, deleted pictures and tried to re-word previous statements to fit a current "agenda".
Something os sutterly hilarious about you guys pointing out that he has, "Been banned on nearly every forum he has been on", and then accuse him of "editing old posts" on said banned forum.
Not the brightest bunch of bananas.
4. NOT ONCE HAS ANYONE SAID WHAT HE DID WAS ILLEGAL. Odd, unnecessary, stupid... yes.
Ah yes. The old adage that law is liberally applied and duties are ominous and ambiguous in nature. Officers may cross the line of what is legally occurring when they are not "comfortable" with it, or it seems "unusual".
"Feelings" are everything, right? Law is emotively based by your assessment. Feelings drive the disposition of duties. :uhoh:
5. Kwik (and Slow) is by far the most defaming person on this forum. Yet Slow gets a slap on the wrist and even though Kwik is obviously using this forum as a rant for his strange behavior, they are both still allowed to post here. Slow, we get it... we are all ignorant. However, you're the one abiding by someone who has the flag of a liar, thus your credibility is gone.
Hey there buddy. I've put my ass in the blender for many fine Americans, and had them do the same for me. I love this nation, and I love the principles upon which it was founded.
My credibility is EXCELLENT.
Furthermore, your comment in and of itself is a vile attack. Kwik has been VERY POLITE on this forum. In fact, many would say excessively so, because he is constantly under attack by fear mongering individuals like yourself.
6. Kwik is the ONLY person to post hard copied documents about him, and then rants about it being public. What’s the point?
The point is
transparency.
You can't see it because you LOVE law enforcement and would abide any irrational or unlawful activity on their behalf.
It is comical to me that two of the largest anti-kwik entities posting on this forum right now, admit to having SEVERELY close ties to law enforcement and the judicial system.
Leonard may post what HE LIKES about himself at any time. That is his discretion. It is NOT appropriate for the government to act outside of regulation or duty, in an attempt to incriminate a law abiding citizen, whom you yourself admit is law abiding by confirming he has broken no laws.
You keep on the heels of your knight in shining armor there Slow, tbqn, Thundar, McX etc...
Is this a thinly veiled homosexuality joke or what? Yes. Yes it is.
You and your ilk have been doing this subtly inserted verbiage and ad-hominem crap for a while. Hence my straightforward responses.
There is no debating with you folks. It always comes back to the same thing.... "What laws were broke" ... Again... none... we (I) never said there were.
Thanks for confirming kwiks law abiding status.
There is no debating with us because we ask for factual representation, while you and your friends cling to the emotional and dramatic.
"OH NO ITS GOT 31 ROUNDS!"
"I have to build a bunch of metaphorical bridges to believe this, but I believe kwik was arrested!"
"Its an AK pistol, its a novelty!" (Like a pez dispenser right? It has no defense value :lol: )
The same old emotional responses on "woulda coulda shoulda" keep eeking and emenating from your camp, and here we are a year later, and kwik is still polite, and respectful to all of you despite your assaults. Did I mention he has not broken any laws and continues to be safe in everything he does?
WOW!
NO DEAD BABIES OR MASS SHOOTINGS!
Half of you closet hoplophobes claimed this was inevitable a year ago. In fact, a certain individual from the "Anti-Kwik" camp claimed flat out that kwik (and I by proxy) were the next "Fort Hood shooters", or "David Koresh".
I am laughing so hard at you guys right now, because frankly, you look like idiots.
Have a great weekend!
