Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 130

Thread: kwikrnu lost his lawsuit against State of TN Unconstitutionality of HCP law

  1. #1
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393

    kwikrnu lost his lawsuit against State of TN Unconstitutionality of HCP law

    Judge dismissed the case.

    Here is what Leonard said on another forum...

    http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/...761701#p761701

    Order was issued an hour ago in my lawsuit against the State of Tennesee. To recap I sued the State claiming the law which prohibits the carry of a loaded handgun was unconstitutional. There are no exceptions to the law, but there are several defenses which include: handgun carry permit, fishing, hunting, law enforcement, and private property.

    The judge only addressed the TN constitution and did not address other violations I stated including; 2nd & 14th Amendments to the US Constitution and the equal rights section of the TN Constitution. I may motion to amend the judgment because he forgot to mention them. He only focused on the right to bear arms of the TN Constitution which is wierd because he mentions my arguments in the first sentence of the second paragraph...

    Link to order: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&p...ODdmYWY2&hl=en

    Since the TN, FL, and TX constitutions regarding the bearing of arms are almost identicle I imagine that all those States must do to deny the carry of a firearm is deny a permit/license.
    Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    158
    Imagine that. The next dismissal will be the action against the Ranger.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Thanks for the info.

    Can't say I'm really surprised.

    But....While I disagree with almost all of the ways he's gone about things...I have to admit, on the surface I think 39-17-1307 is unconstitutional myself. Again almost hate to say this, but for the some of the same reasons he cited. It makes possession illegal...period and there are only defenses to the law, not exceptions. Even being on your property is only a defense, not an exception.

    However...it would appear the judge doesn't see that way....lol Also that being said, I still don't think even if 39-17-1307 was found unconstitutional it would been carry without a permit in TN. Because the TN constitution does expressly allow the legislature to regulate the wearing of arms.
    "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

  4. #4
    Regular Member HvyMtl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    271
    Proof of the old saying about those who represent themselves.

    Had he put money where his mouth is, perhaps it would have been different.

    But, at least it was dismissed, which basically does not create precedent for someone who wants to go after the law in the future.

    Again, all I see is a fellow claiming to be for 2nd A rights, and not acting so.
    Μολὼν λάβε

  5. #5
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Can't disagree with ya HvyMtl.

    Gone about in a different way there may have been a better chance.

    Of course I still think even the most favorable outcome (if was ruled unconstitutional, but the addressed by the legislature) would be simply making some of the defenses in 39-17-1308, exceptions instead...including having a HCP.
    "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 HvyMtl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    271
    Yes, Fall Guy, I think you may be right, with that allowance in the State Constitution...
    Μολὼν λάβε

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Knoxville
    Posts
    184
    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Yes, Fall Guy, I think you may be right, with that allowance in the State Constitution...
    TN Constitution states that carry is only regulated for one reason: to prevent crime.
    The only crime that comes about from the act of carrying a gun is the one the state has created for the act itself.

    Since there is no way that the state can prove that unlicensed carry of firearms increases crime, the HCP process should indeed be ruled unconstitutional.

    - OS

  8. #8
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by Oh Shoot View Post
    TN Constitution states that carry is only regulated for one reason: to prevent crime.
    The only crime that comes about from the act of carrying a gun is the one the state has created for the act itself.

    Since there is no way that the state can prove that unlicensed carry of firearms increases crime, the HCP process should indeed be ruled unconstitutional.

    - OS
    True....

    But of course the anti-'s would argue that requiring a permit prevents the crime of those not qualified to carry from carrying. Or might even say any regulation that restricts carry helps prevent that person/firearm from committing a crime.

    I of course don't agree....just saying.....

    Of course as anyone with any sense knows....laws do nothing to prevent crime period...if they did...we would not have the need for courts and jails. Laws simply tell you what is unlawful and provide the punishment for violation. I have yet to hear of law that actually "prevented" a crime.
    "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

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    I know RussP was wetting his pants in excitement over this case being thrown out, however, the order has been amended, so the case will now move forward.

    I will ask Leonard if it is appropriate, and/or acceptable for me to post the order itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...
    On "Personal Responsibility just after the previous, in the same exact thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Religion uses is as a tool, they did not create it.
    The wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You think that I am ill-equipped...hit me with your best shot Einstein, I am calling you out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Free will is only slightly a conscious exercise...

  10. #10
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Here is the link to the Court's amended ruling posted by Leonard on another forum...

    https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&p...ODFhZGE1&hl=en
    Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...
    On "Personal Responsibility just after the previous, in the same exact thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Religion uses is as a tool, they did not create it.
    The wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You think that I am ill-equipped...hit me with your best shot Einstein, I am calling you out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Free will is only slightly a conscious exercise...

  12. #12
    McX
    Guest
    i'm sorry to hear Kwik lost, i miss not having him around on the forum anymore. he's alright in my book.

  13. #13
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    i'm sorry to hear Kwik lost, i miss not having him around on the forum anymore. he's alright in my book.
    Look at the last two links... His suit has been RESURRECTED!

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    i'm sorry to hear Kwik lost, i miss not having him around on the forum anymore. he's alright in my book.
    The suit RussP claims he "lost" (The judge refused to let it go to trial - i.e. Not a freaking "loss"), was reversed, and now the case will be heard.

    Somebody counted their eggs before they hatched.


    Just sayin...
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...
    On "Personal Responsibility just after the previous, in the same exact thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Religion uses is as a tool, they did not create it.
    The wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You think that I am ill-equipped...hit me with your best shot Einstein, I am calling you out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Free will is only slightly a conscious exercise...

  15. #15
    McX
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    The suit RussP claims he "lost" (The judge refused to let it go to trial - i.e. Not a freaking "loss"), was reversed, and now the case will be heard.

    Somebody counted their eggs before they hatched.


    Just sayin...
    i'm glad to hear that, kwik deserves some modicum of justice.

  16. #16
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    slow, you are so predictable. It's never if you'll begin insulting someone who holds different viewpoints than yours, it's only when.

    If doing that gets you to your warm and fuzzy place, so be it.

    Now that Leonard has stripped all the personal issues from his action and is pursuing a pure challenge to the constitutionality of the HCP law, I support the action. The good citizens of Tennessee should be able to carry without asking permission from their State. If this case achieves that goal, it will establish useful precedence for others' battles for the same. I believe everyone on OCDO agrees that will be very, very good.

    What bothers me is this. Why will Leonard not seek legal counsel with Constitutional law experience? This is, potentially, a landmark case. I told him on another forum that I really wished he'd lawyer up on this. His reply, "Yet, I won't."

    So, slow, you communicate with him. Would you try convincing him this is important to not only Tennessee, but other States with similarly structured laws, that at this level an attorney might be useful?
    Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    So, slow, you communicate with him. Would you try convincing him this is important to not only Tennessee, but other States with similarly structured laws, that at this level an attorney might be useful?
    I highly doubt that it will help. He has stated multiple times that it is only about him, and not about others.

    He seems to want to be "that guy" that fixes it; for himself. And if he can't, he will do his best to "fix" it so no one else will have it either.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    slow, you are so predictable. It's never if you'll begin insulting someone who holds different viewpoints than yours, it's only when.
    RussP, you are so predictable.

    Not only did I call that you wouldn't hang out after Leonard stopped posting and/or was banned, I also stated you weren't truly for open carry, and, alas, I was completely correct on both counts.

    My issue is not with differing viewpoints, but instead with attempting to hide said viewpoints under a cloak of deceit.

    Nothing more, nothing less.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    If doing that gets you to your warm and fuzzy place, so be it.
    My "warm and fuzzy place" would certainly be where you are open, completely straightforward, and honest in all activities, so that we may have a meaningful discussion.

    You let me know when/where you and your cohorts are willing to get there, and you will notice a polar shift in my responses, much as have been observed in other areas of this forum over the past few years.

    A mere peek at my signature limelights your true nature.

    If only the people on this forum had the capability, or the desire, to actually look at what you talk about, and how you talk about it, in the JBT section of glocktalk.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Now that Leonard has stripped all the personal issues from his action and is pursuing a pure challenge to the constitutionality of the HCP law, I support the action.
    You support the lawful carry of AK derivative pistols now? - That's great!
    You support the carry of firearms in parks? - That's great!
    You support redress of grievances for the unlawful siezure and termination of Leonards HCP for no purpose, and with no substantiation? - That's great!

    All of these patently lawful activities being violated have steered the ship to where it is sailing now. Not that you are likely to agree with that.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    The good citizens of Tennessee should be able to carry without asking permission from their State. If this case achieves that goal, it will establish useful precedence for others' battles for the same. I believe everyone on OCDO agrees that will be very, very good.
    Constitutional carry in the state of Tennessee would be fantastic.

    Not that I would expect you to extend any gratitude towards Leonard, were he to win his case, and the outcome be precisely that.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    What bothers me is this. Why will Leonard not seek legal counsel with Constitutional law experience?
    I have listened to you groan about Leonard finding legal counsel for quite some time now, and once he does, it is now "not good enough".

    The sliding scale of standards you use as a metric to gauge "acceptability" is either broken, or bipolar.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    This is, potentially, a landmark case. I told him on another forum that I really wished he'd lawyer up on this. His reply, "Yet, I won't."
    Have you not seen that he has retained counsel?

    Might it be that he is tired of RussP, his adoring, stalking admirer, following him around for years, and denigrating his efforts at every last turn?

    Might it be the compelling difference in your demeanor between here and the JBT's on GT, that belies your true intentions?

    Maybe you should have been polite with him from the get go, and less inflammatory in accusation.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    So, slow, you communicate with him. Would you try convincing him this is important to not only Tennessee, but other States with similarly structured laws, that at this level an attorney might be useful?

    I will, and have.

    Patience.

    Leonard is more insightful than you think.


    You need to work on minimizing your chest thumping, and giddiness, in posting that Leonard "lost a case", when the case was:

    A.) Never heard in the first place (Which is what actually occurred, and is not a "loss")

    and

    B.) Has the potential to be re-opened. (Which did happen.)
    Last edited by slowfiveoh; 02-23-2011 at 11:25 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...
    On "Personal Responsibility just after the previous, in the same exact thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Religion uses is as a tool, they did not create it.
    The wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You think that I am ill-equipped...hit me with your best shot Einstein, I am calling you out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Free will is only slightly a conscious exercise...

  19. #19
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by wrightme View Post
    I highly doubt that it will help. He has stated multiple times that it is only about him, and not about others.

    He seems to want to be "that guy" that fixes it; for himself. And if he can't, he will do his best to "fix" it so no one else will have it either.
    If this is true, wouldn't it mean that supporting him is the only intelligent and logical reaction?

    After all, if it really means a win for him would mean a win for all of us, and a loss would mean a loss for all of us, what does wishing for his failure say about a person?

    "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
    Ever read any Ayn Rand?

  20. #20
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    slow, ...It's never if you'll begin insulting someone who holds different viewpoints than yours, it's only when.
    Oh, why not...
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    RussP, you are so predictable.

    Not only did I call that you wouldn't hang out after Leonard stopped posting and/or was banned,
    Yes, slow, I guess I am. I log into OCDO everyday. I browse multiple sub-forums several times a day. They are a great source for information and opinions.
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    I also stated you weren't truly for open carry...
    I truly am for and advocate responsible open carry when and where appropriate. What is good and right for me may not be appropriate for others who open carry. There are many personal decisions involved with carrying a firearm for self defense. I've made mine, but understand others will make different ones.
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    My issue is not with differing viewpoints, but instead with attempting to hide said viewpoints under a cloak of deceit.

    Nothing more, nothing less.
    Okay, don't know what that means.
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    My "warm and fuzzy place" would certainly be where you are open, completely straightforward, and honest in all activities, so that we may have a meaningful discussion.

    You let me know when/where you and your cohorts are willing to get there, and you will notice a polar shift in my responses, much as have been observed in other areas of this forum over the past few years.

    A mere peek at my signature limelights your true nature.

    If only the people on this forum had the capability, or the desire, to actually look at what you talk about, and how you talk about it, in the JBT section of glocktalk.
    Well, that forum is a members only forum, so I can't discuss what is posted there. I will say you and Leonard have been topics. You seem to be proud of my comment about you.

    I have been open, completely straightforward, and honest. You just don't like what I have to say.
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    You support the lawful carry of AK derivative pistols now? - That's great!
    You support the carry of firearms in parks? - That's great!
    You support redress of grievances for the unlawful siezure and termination of Leonards HCP for no purpose, and with no substantiation? - That's great!

    All of these patently lawful activities being violated have steered the ship to where it is sailing now. Not that you are likely to agree with that.
    Oh, there is no disagreement that Leonard's behavior gave rise to several situations which have, or will have, an impact on firearm laws in Tennessee and, probably, other States.

    As far as your questions, I do not remember saying I do not support the lawful carry of an AK derivative pistol. Doing so is protected by the Constitution and Tennessee law in Leonard's case.

    Carry of firearms in parks - that is allowed by Tennessee law. The allowed part is what needs changing.

    I certainly do support redress of grievances for a suspended permit. The appeal process is part of the law. Leonard is the one who waved his right to appeal. I believe that was unwise.
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    Constitutional carry in the state of Tennessee would be fantastic.

    Not that I would expect you to extend any gratitude towards Leonard, were he to win his case, and the outcome be precisely that.
    Why not wait for the outcome, slow?
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    I have listened to you groan about Leonard finding legal counsel for quite some time now, and once he does, it is now "not good enough".

    The sliding scale of standards you use as a metric to gauge "acceptability" is either broken, or bipolar.

    Have you not seen that he has retained counsel?
    slow, what are you talking about? The only attorney Leonard has posted about is for the Radnor Lake case. He predicts there his attorney, former military and former LEO, is going to wipe the floor with the Rangers and officers from Metro PD. I look forward to reading about that.

    I believe someone with a Constitutional law background, real, successful courtroom experience would be an advantage in his challenge case.

    Just last night he said he would not get an attorney for the challenge and will represent represent himself because he can.

    Did you talk to him this morning?
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    Might it be that he is tired of RussP, his adoring, stalking admirer, following him around for years, and denigrating his efforts at every last turn?

    Might it be the compelling difference in your demeanor between here and the JBT's on GT, that belies your true intentions?

    Maybe you should have been polite with him from the get go, and less inflammatory in accusation.
    Could be...
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    I will, and have.

    Patience.

    Leonard is more insightful than you think.


    You need to work on minimizing your chest thumping, and giddiness, in posting that Leonard "lost a case", when the case was:

    A.) Never heard in the first place (Which is what actually occurred, and is not a "loss")

    and

    B.) Has the potential to be re-opened. (Which did happen.)
    Chest thumping and giddiness? Let me go back to that post... Okay, I'm back...
    kwikrnu lost his lawsuit against State of TN Unconstitutionality of HCP law

    Judge dismissed the case.

    Here is what Leonard said on another forum...
    I just can't find all that in those words.

    Now, let's get back on topic.
    Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    If this is true
    It is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    wouldn't it mean that supporting him is the only intelligent and logical reaction?
    It depends on the arguments of the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    After all, if it really means a win for him would mean a win for all of us, and a loss would mean a loss for all of us
    Not necessarily. He most likely will argue the case in a very specific manner to apply only to his current situation. It is unlikely that he will challenge TN permit process as a whole, only for himself. He will more than likely lose because he canceled his appeal (that is mandated by statute) for the suspension of his permit (no one knows why).

    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    what does wishing for his failure say about a person?
    I have not seen anyone saying they wishes he loose a case that challenges TN permitting system for all law abiding citizens. I do personally hope he fails in his attempts to collect a paycheck in other cases from the good people of TN for what were HIS ACTIONS.


    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    Ever read any Ayn Rand?
    Yes
    Last edited by Kingfish; 02-23-2011 at 02:25 PM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Oh, why not...Yes, slow, I guess I am. I log into OCDO everyday. I browse multiple sub-forums several times a day. They are a great source for information and opinions.
    Yet your active involvement stopped after Leonard was banned.

    Just as I claimed it would.

    Interesting.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    I truly am for and advocate responsible open carry when and where appropriate.
    Define "responsible".

    For concealed carry snobs, it is not having your pistol on the shiny side of fabric.

    For "gun collectors", it is not walking around in public with an AK derivative.

    Define: "When Appropriate"

    Define: "Where Appropriate"


    Your sentence literally is the overwhelming problem with the movement as a cohesive whole. If we are to move forward with true Constitutional Carry, then a united front is necessary.

    If we are to reach a united front, then the recognition, on a personal level, that what we deem to be "reasonable" applies only to ourselves, and our own self regulation, and should not be used to impose our will upon others.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    What is good and right for me may not be appropriate for others who open carry.
    That's fantastic, so long as you do not use your own personal limitations as a standard to impose upon the rights of others.

    A key point people cannot seem to grasp that is factually, and inherently unavoidable and true.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    There are many personal decisions involved with carrying a firearm for self defense.
    There are indeed. So long as your choice of sidearm, holster, and attire, is not set as the governing standard for your other countrymen.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    I've made mine, but understand others will make different ones.
    Of course.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Okay, don't know what that means.Well, that forum is a members only forum, so I can't discuss what is posted there.
    You don't have to. Software and DB's are such fickle things.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    I will say you and Leonard have been topics.
    The comments from a particular member who posted here, in which he addresses the sexuality of both Leonard and myself, is quite amusing.

    Although I, nor Leonard, are homosexual, I think that particular officer may be homophobic.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    You seem to be proud of my comment about you.
    Glaringly proud.

    It proved my initial comments about you, and it proves the duplicity of your character.

    You wear the "I'm a nice guy" hat here.
    You wear a different one elsewhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    I have been open, completely straightforward, and honest. You just don't like what I have to say.
    RussP.

    -It took you 4 flipping pages of argument to concede that you never even watched the video of Leonard interacting in Bell Meade.
    -It took you another 3 pages to concede that the officer pointed the firearm at oncoming traffic and the Bell Meade Country Club, for a full minute.
    -THEN you tried to absolve his dangerous activity, before finally, after pages upon pages, you eventually conceded what he did was wrong. (But you still blamed Leonard for it. LOL)

    All of this after you chide Leonard for the incident, and comment on "how it was handled".

    I guess for you, "honesty" is in the eye of the beholder?

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Oh, there is no disagreement that Leonard's behavior gave rise to several situations which have, or will have, an impact on firearm laws in Tennessee and, probably, other States.
    So what "has" been affected by Leonards "behavior"?

    The only thing that has actually happened so far, is the removal of a Jim Crow law that was not preempted.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    As far as your questions, I do not remember saying I do not support the lawful carry of an AK derivative pistol. Doing so is protected by the Constitution and Tennessee law in Leonard's case.
    In earlier arguments, you had specifically mentioned the AK pistol as "excessive".

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Carry of firearms in parks - that is allowed by Tennessee law. The allowed part is what needs changing.
    Holy Christ on a rubber crutch.

    We agree on something.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    I certainly do support redress of grievances for a suspended permit. The appeal process is part of the law. Leonard is the one who waved his right to appeal. I believe that was unwise.
    Leonards permit was taken without lawful purpose.
    Not a single agency could substantiate why it was revoked other than to state he presented a "Material risk of likely harm to the public".

    Why should he have to appeal?

    Where is his due process, before revocation of a right?

    Could Leonard not have substantial proof now that the DHS may infer powers unto itself that are outside of those they are authorized to have?

    With what authority, and under what specific law did they remove his permit?

    Oh wait, let's not ask these questions, because it is Leonard we are talking about, and because you don't like that he [insert reason here], regardless it's legality and its Constitutionality, we should slap him around and pray his rights get violated.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Why not wait for the outcome, slow?
    Please note that I stated, "...were he...".
    Please note I did not create a thread entitled "Leonard won his case!", when it hasn't even gone to court yet.

    That would be almost as absurd as creating a thread titled, "kwikrnu lost his lawsuit against State of TN Unconstitutionality of HCP law", when the case never went to court, and therefore could not have been "lost" in the first place.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    slow, what are you talking about? The only attorney Leonard has posted about is for the Radnor Lake case. He predicts there his attorney, former military and former LEO, is going to wipe the floor with the Rangers and officers from Metro PD. I look forward to reading about that.
    I fail to see why basic common sense cannot be applied here, lol.

    RussP, he has the consult of an attorney for another case. Might he have said Attorneys ear regardless his pro serepresentation?

    Just sayin...

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    I believe someone with a Constitutional law background, real, successful courtroom experience would be an advantage in his challenge case.
    I believe if people could be less shortsighted about their own personal insecurities, and wade beyond the waters of their selfishness, they would be offering to set up a fund for Leonard, that others may pitch into, to help him procure whomever he wants.

    I wonder if the distaste of being shat upon by those who profess to call him brother, has finally soiled his appetite for supporting all of us.

    I mean, again, just sayin...

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Just last night he said he would not get an attorney for the challenge and will represent represent himself because he can.
    Well, he did get the denial overturned on his own.
    He did predict specifically, that the Bell Meade city council would have to bury the entire law, and he was right. It happened exactly, and precisely as he predicted.

    Might he be more capable than you believe?


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Did you talk to him this morning?
    Nope.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Could be...
    Is.


    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Chest thumping and giddiness? Let me go back to that post... Okay, I'm back...I just can't find all that in those words.
    The words are in the title alone. You couldn't wait to post how he "lost a case", when said "case" was never there to "lose".

    Maybe I'll let you go on this one because you "worded it wrong".

    Quote Originally Posted by RussP View Post
    Now, let's get back on topic.
    This entire conversation has been specifically on topic.


    Quote Originally Posted by kingfish
    He will more than likely lose because he canceled his appeal (that is mandated by statute) for the suspension of his permit (no one knows why).
    The appeal is mandated by statute when the permit is revoked lawfully.

    No one shall stand trial without due process.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...
    On "Personal Responsibility just after the previous, in the same exact thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Religion uses is as a tool, they did not create it.
    The wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You think that I am ill-equipped...hit me with your best shot Einstein, I am calling you out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Free will is only slightly a conscious exercise...

  23. #23
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    The appeal is mandated by statute when the permit is revoked lawfully.

    No one shall stand trial without due process.
    Noone knows if the permit was suspended lawfully or not since Kwik canceled the appeal for reasons unknown.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post
    Noone knows if the permit was suspended lawfully or not since Kwik canceled the appeal for reasons unknown.
    That's not correct.

    His permit was revoked without charge. "Material likelihood of risk to the public" is nothing more than an ambiguous comment found in 1340-2-4-.15, and not a criminal charge as is required by the process. What this entry does is allows for a vague, and ambiguous reasoning to be allowed when denying an individual their Constitutional Rights.

    Submitting to appeal is nothing more than going before a council for doing nothing wrong.

    In fact, I would wager that the unlawful revocation of his permit, will serve as material evidence supporting his suit.

    Either way, what is "in the past", will come out as his entire case is hinged upon the illegal revocation of his permit by using entry C of 1340-2-4-.15.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...
    On "Personal Responsibility just after the previous, in the same exact thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Religion uses is as a tool, they did not create it.
    The wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You think that I am ill-equipped...hit me with your best shot Einstein, I am calling you out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Free will is only slightly a conscious exercise...

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    That's not correct.

    His permit was revoked without charge. "Material likelihood of risk to the public" is nothing more than an ambiguous comment found in 1340-2-4-.15, and not a criminal charge as is required by the process. What this entry does is allows for a vague, and ambiguous reasoning to be allowed when denying an individual their Constitutional Rights.

    Submitting to appeal is nothing more than going before a council for doing nothing wrong.

    In fact, I would wager that the unlawful revocation of his permit, will serve as material evidence supporting his suit.

    Either way, what is "in the past", will come out as his entire case is hinged upon the illegal revocation of his permit by using entry C of 1340-2-4-.15.
    Sans appeal, this is not a fact in evidence. That was the point.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin 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
  •