Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 73

Thread: News article concerning Kwikrnu

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    12

    News article concerning Kwikrnu


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    12
    well.....I thought it was a good article.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Fallguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    McKenzie Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    705
    Sorry...did read it.

    But not much more to say that hasn't been said a million times....
    "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
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    12
    the comments are interesting. Kwik himself gets in on the debate.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Every time a gun rights advocates worry about what the antis will think and do because of someone else's actions, I have to shake my head.

    Look: if someone has a problem with a specific person's actions, they need to take it up with that person, not me. Pro-gun folks who fret and worry and want to shut down kwikrnu are actually feeding into the anti-gun mindset: that all people should be restricted from guns because of what some few might do.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Every time a gun rights advocates worry about what the antis will think and do because of someone else's actions, I have to shake my head.

    Look: if someone has a problem with a specific person's actions, they need to take it up with that person, not me. Pro-gun folks who fret and worry and want to shut down kwikrnu are actually feeding into the anti-gun mindset: that all people should be restricted from guns because of what some few might do.
    Winnah Winnah, Chicken Dinnah!
    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...

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Every time a gun rights advocates worry about what the antis will think and do because of someone else's actions, I have to shake my head.

    Look: if someone has a problem with a specific person's actions, they need to take it up with that person, not me. Pro-gun folks who fret and worry and want to shut down kwikrnu are actually feeding into the anti-gun mindset: that all people should be restricted from guns because of what some few might do.
    Very true.

    It is for this reason that I would say to those who seem to have the biggest problem with Leonard: "Physician, heal thyself!"

  8. #8
    Regular Member HvyMtl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    271
    Hmm. Interesting Kwik would write comments on the comment section of the story, but refuses to be interviewed.

    If you want to comment directly to Brian Haas, he has actually joined tngunowners.com forum for direct input on his stories from actual gun owners, a rare thing in media, this day and age. Pretty fair peace, particularly since the Tennessean is very Anti.

    As for Kwik, the main concern is this: Those who have a fear and lack of understanding of firearms, and their respective owners, react very poorly to actions like Kwikrnu's. Typically, what they will do is run, screaming, to the government to do something to prevent such actions again. So, it is the fear Kwikrnu's actions will create new anti laws. Valid concern? Many would say yes, others no, and has been argued here ad nauseum.

    To reiterate my issues with Kwikrnu: He failed to take the safety of the general public, and the officers responding to him, in mind, and he stated he was not responsible, morally, or legally, for them. In addition, he stated he is not for the expansion of the rights of the gun owner, but expansion of his rights, even if he may damage the rights of others. And he stated, he believes if he cannot have a certain right, then others should not have that right. Not exactly the hero some make him out to be.

    At least, it seems, he has learned his lesson with pro se litigation, and has hired an attorney this time.

    And, too bad he would not go ahead and be interviewed, as I believe, his public perspective could have been improved, or, at least, his intent better explained.

    I do hope Kwikrnu changes his mind, and does an interview. I would like the journalist to ask some specifics, like the reason behind why he canceled his law granted appeal to the suspension of his carry permit. Why he believes the carry permit law is not constitutional, both federal, and state levels (even though the state constitution allows for gun regulation for the safety of the public.) Why he went the sensationalist route to end the Belle Meade City Code, rather than showing up to a public hearing, and merely request the code be removed, before going out and showing its absurdity in public.
    Last edited by HvyMtl; 02-05-2011 at 12:29 PM.
    Μολὼν λάβε

  9. #9
    McX
    Guest
    i still like the guy, even though he got tossed off of here. he goes to the edge, i can respect that; if no one goes to the edge, we wont know where the edge is, and will always stay in the area of relative safety, gaining nothing, challenging nothing...............like sheep.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    i still like the guy, even though he got tossed off of here. he goes to the edge, i can respect that; if no one goes to the edge, we wont know where the edge is, and will always stay in the area of relative safety, gaining nothing, challenging nothing...............like sheep.
    why don't you "go to the edge". I'll keep an eye out for you on CNN

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee, United States
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Erik88 View Post
    why don't you "go to the edge". I'll keep an eye out for you on CNN
    How about I go to the egde? Especially since I live in Nashville, I can go to the edge at the Capitol.

    If all you want to do is hide behind some permission slip and be content with your eroding freedoms, fine. But don't insult those who actually are taking the time to fight for our rights and put the spotlight on criminals with badges.
    Last edited by WCrawford; 02-10-2011 at 02:16 AM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by WCrawford View Post
    How about I go to the egde? Especially since I live in Nashville, I can go to the edge at the Capitol.

    If all you want to do is hide behind some permission slip and be content with your eroding freedoms, fine. But don't insult those who actually are taking the time to fight for XXourXX their rights with admited disregard of others rights and put the spotlight on criminals with badges.
    Fixed.

    Keep in mind that Kwik has said repeatedly that he cares nothing for the rights of others and that if he is not allowed a right or a privilage that noone should.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Frankly, who gives a damn?

    I don't recall that my caring about your rights was a prerequisite for my having, or exercising, my own.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    Frankly, who gives a damn?

    I don't recall that my caring about your rights was a prerequisite for my having, or exercising, my own.
    Mr. Crawford was saying that Kwik is fighting for OUR rights which he clearly is not.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post
    Mr. Crawford was saying that Kwik is fighting for OUR rights which he clearly is not.
    That may not be his intent. Furthermore, you and I may disagree on whether selfishly fighting for one's own rights serves the function of fighting for others' rights as well.
    Last edited by marshaul; 02-10-2011 at 02:29 PM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    That may not be his intent. Furthermore, you and I may disagree on whether selfishly fighting for one's own rights serves the function of fighting for others' rights as well.
    Rosa Parks comes to mind, seeing as how this is "Black" History Month. If you 'selfishly' protect your rights, you protect mine, as well--even to the extent of the law of unintended consequences. While I didn't agree with a lot of what he avowed--or some of his tactics, in general I was sympathetic to him and found some of the collusion the cop world committed against him disgusting, but hardly surprising.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    Rosa Parks comes to mind, seeing as how this is "Black" History Month. If you 'selfishly' protect your rights, you protect mine, as well--even to the extent of the law of unintended consequences. While I didn't agree with a lot of what he avowed--or some of his tactics, in general I was sympathetic to him and found some of the collusion the cop world committed against him disgusting, but hardly surprising.
    I too was sympathetic (a guy walking in the woods with a legal firearm) until I found out it was all planned out to sue and get a paycheck. How about when he said that if he couldn't get his "right" to carry back that he would do what he could so that noone could carry?

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee, United States
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post
    Fixed.

    Keep in mind that Kwik has said repeatedly that he cares nothing for the rights of others and that if he is not allowed a right or a privilage that noone should.

    Whether he or anyone cares about another rights matters little. The effect of removal of unconstitutional laws and cessation of harassment by criminals with badges improves the rights of everyone.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee, United States
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post
    I too was sympathetic (a guy walking in the woods with a legal firearm) until I found out it was all planned out to sue and get a paycheck. How about when he said that if he couldn't get his "right" to carry back that he would do what he could so that noone could carry?
    So what if he wanted to sue? Do people who have their rights violated only have your approval to sue for damages when they were unprepared for the violation? Or do you contend that a rights violation doesn't occur if a citizen "lays a trap" and the cops willing walk into it? Why would that matter? Are government representatives somehow beyond the ability to be sued when they act in criminal manners (since it is obvious they will never be prosecuted for their criminal activity)?

    Let me put it plainly, if I were to lose my "right" to carry a firearm, because of governmental criminality, I would ensure that everyone in the state of Tennessee loses that "right" as well.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Even if Leonard didn't even like guns, I would make the following argument:

    The only problem with a person who makes a vocation of (legally) baiting the police into rights violations, so as to subsist or otherwise profit from the proceeds of lawsuits resulting therefrom, is the police themselves who enable such profit, by violating rights in the first place.

    And that's really all there is to be said about that.
    Last edited by marshaul; 02-10-2011 at 11:26 PM.

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    Even if Leonard didn't even like guns, I would make the following argument:

    The only problem with a person who makes a vocation of (legally) baiting the police into rights violations, so as to subsist or otherwise profit from the proceeds of lawsuits resulting therefrom, is the police themselves who enable such profit, by violating rights in the first place.

    And that's really all there is to be said about that.
    +1

    You keep that up and I'm gonna have to pass the torch.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    Even if Leonard didn't even like guns, I would make the following argument:

    The only problem with a person who makes a vocation of (legally) baiting the police into rights violations, so as to subsist or otherwise profit from the proceeds of lawsuits resulting therefrom, is the police themselves who enable such profit, by violating rights in the first place.

    And that's really all there is to be said about that.
    This is it. In an absolute nutshell.

    You can wriggle a worm on the end of a hook all you like if LEO didn't have the stupidity to bite.
    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 Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post
    I too was sympathetic (a guy walking in the woods with a legal firearm) until I found out it was all planned out to sue and get a paycheck. How about when he said that if he couldn't get his "right" to carry back that he would do what he could so that noone could carry?
    Sympathetic to 'him,' not necessarilly his avowed purposes.

  24. #24
    Regular Member HvyMtl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    271
    (FYI: Rosa Parks was "picked" to be the lady refusing her place on the bus. It was planned. Wisely, as you had to have a very compassionate "victim" of the law to show its absurdity. - If you do not believe me, go visit the Civil Rights Museum in Birmingham, AL.)

    Personally, I do not mind the "baiting" of the cops to do wrong. I hope he planned for the possible beat down.

    Personally, I really do not care if he intended to sue.

    The issue I have is this: Making a hero out of him, when clearly he does not deserve the tag. He has proven, time and again, here and other places, his pure selfishness, and lack of caring for the negative impacts of his actions.

    Not planning to ensure the safety of the innocent general public, when intentionally confronting the police is fool hardy, at best. And could have led to a deadly result. And saying, "but that did not happen," misses the point it bloody well could have.

    And stating, if he does not "deserve" a right, then no one else should have it, questions his morals.

    I wonder if your viewpoints on Kwikrnu would change, if a negative response to Kwikrnu limits your rights, due to his actions... I bet they would. Some here would claim we have been quite lucky so far this has not occurred...

    He is an extremist. Yes. Is he the best thing for gun rights? Probably not. Does he have the right to act in this manner? Yes. Is it the right thing to do? Obvious debate point.

    Could any of his achievements been done without going to the extreme, as he has? Yes, some could. (Belle Meade could have been easily handled by going to a public meeting... something he decided not to do...)

    Can his actions still lead to a negative impact on your rights? Possibly. Depends on how and what he pushes in court. If done wrong, he can set legal precedent which we all could be saddled with.

    Again, I am glad he finally got legal representation, as the representation may limit this concern of bad precedent. I do wonder if the representation is now across the board, as he had few cases going on at the same time...

    I DO hope Kwikrnu decides to better explain himself, than he has, so far, in multiple locations on the internet, by having a full on interview with Mr. Haas. As it seems, Mr. Haas may be the most neutral journalist he will find in Mid Tennessee on gun rights...
    Last edited by HvyMtl; 02-11-2011 at 02:44 PM.
    Μολὼν λάβε

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    (FYI: Rosa Parks was "picked" to be the lady refusing her place on the bus. It was planned. Wisely, as you had to have a very compassionate "victim" of the law to show its absurdity. - If you do not believe me, go visit the Civil Rights Museum in Birmingham, AL.)
    This is an oft quoted misnomer. Gray Peterson and I had a conversation about this, and actually, looking back into Rosa Parks own history, she was merely "affiliated" with the NAACP at the time (Secretary?), but not specifically chosen. There was another woman who may have footed the bill, as the NAACP WAS actively looking to push this issue, specifically in Montgomery. However, that woman was underage, pregnant, and not married.

    The idea that Rosa Parks was "chosen", is not true. She merely knew about the situation, and elected to make herself the scapegoat, thinking that the NAACP, an organization her husband touted as "powerless and ineffective", may have her back.

    Here is an excerpt from the library of congress:

    "Although her arrest was not planned, Park's action was consistent with the NAACP's desire to challenge segregated public transport in the courts. A one-day bus boycott coinciding with Parks's December 5 court date resulted in an overwhelming African-American boycott of the bus system. Since black people constituted seventy percent of the transit system's riders, most busses carried few passengers that day."
    Cite - http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/today/dec01.html

    "Consistent with", is not the same as "planned".


    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Personally, I do not mind the "baiting" of the cops to do wrong. I hope he planned for the possible beat down.
    Which are we to be more concerned about?

    The right to act in a lawful manner, and walk amongst our countrymen freely...

    OR

    The possibility of being beaten, shot, and falsely detained by the all too common rogue law enforcement officer, and the security of the thin blue line?

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Personally, I really do not care if he intended to sue.
    Agreed.

    It is incumbent upon Law Enforcement to conduct themselves within the scope of the law, and to act honorably in everything they do.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    The issue I have is this: Making a hero out of him, when clearly he does not deserve the tag. He has proven, time and again, here and other places, his pure selfishness, and lack of caring for the negative impacts of his actions.
    There is a serious misunderstanding here in regards to what people perceive as Leonards wanton disregard for equal rights.

    Consider these facts:

    #1. We are ALL to be equal, specifically with recognized preexisting, enumerated human rights specified in our sovereign law.

    #2. For all of us to be equal, we must support even that which we may deem not to be necessary, but is in line with the term "freedom". Even if it is out of YOUR comfort zone.
    In fact, especially so!
    (This means those who conceal, should stop giving the OC'ers **** for an activity that is the whole equal of their chosen carry method, the only difference being a piece of fabric.)

    #3. When we sacrifice a fellow countryman, on the basis of discomfort, instead of careful, lawfully applied scrutiny, he may become a bit frustrated with those who deem to howl with the wolves, or worse, feed him to them.


    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Not planning to ensure the safety of the innocent general public, when intentionally confronting the police is fool hardy, at best. And could have led to a deadly result. And saying, "but that did not happen," misses the point it bloody well could have.
    Nobody should have to pre-plan the execution of civil rights, even if you are uncomfortable.

    If a group of homosexuals wants to have a mini parade in Central Park, that is their right.

    If a preacher wants to stand on a public corner preaching death to soldiers with his obviously morally bankrupt fellowship, that is their right. I would fight, and die, for thier right to do this, even as they spit in my face.

    Failing to do so only dissolves the bonds that form our great nation, and the unrivaled equality it contains.

    It is fairly erroneous to specify that Leonard did something "dangerous", and to refer to the possibility of injury to innocent bystanders on behalf of unlawful conduct by LEO/LEA as a consequence of his lawful actions.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    And stating, if he does not "deserve" a right, then no one else should have it, questions his morals.
    Kwik and I have been in correspondence every now and then.

    Were you aware that the self professed "freedom loving, RTKBA supporting, firearms enthusiasts" who oppose Leonards actions, have written letters to law enforcement, specifying that "what Leonard did was insane, crazy, and they do not support his actions at all, to include the carry of a AK pistol.", and to furthermore, "use their commentary as the basis for all rationality of all gun owners everywhere"?

    Were you aware that Leonard has received threats, up to and including death?

    I wonder if he is tired of individuals who profess to be his brethren, kicking him in the gut, and feeding him to the wolves.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    I wonder if your viewpoints on Kwikrnu would change, if a negative response to Kwikrnu limits your rights, due to his actions... I bet they would.
    I think the far more relevant question is:

    Why would we lay blame expressly on an individual acting in a legal manner, and substantiate the ideology that it is acceptable to support the egregious acts of law enforcement, in an unlawful manner mind you, towards a law abiding citizen.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Some here would claim we have been quite lucky so far this has not occurred...
    While others would point out that he successfully got a Jim Crow law that could have easily been used as a legal loophole for harassing law abiding open carriers within Bell Meade, off the books.

    Furthermore, he studied the law concerning it, and instead of yielding to a government structure that has failed us so many times, took action to ensure it would be changed.

    Bell Meade now fully complies with state preemption.

    Nobody has had the fortitude, and integrity and to thank Kwik for this yet.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    He is an extremist. Yes.
    Colorful adjectives get us nowhere.

    Gun owners are "extremists" according to many naive citizens.
    CC'ers are "extremists" according to "hunters", and those, "normal gun owners". (Hey there's no deer downtown!"
    OC'ers are "extremists" to CC'ers, because we carry our firearms on the outside.
    Kwik is an "extremist" to you and others, because he doesn't fit your definition of "sensible".

    In reality, each and every categorical listing above, relates to free men, acting within the scope of liberty, and our constitutional rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Is he the best thing for gun rights? Probably not.
    Well...he did get a law off the books. While we can dream up a thousand things we don't like about someone else activities, so long as they have not done anything illegal, who cares?

    Just saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Does he have the right to act in this manner? Yes.
    So based on this comment...

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Is it the right thing to do? Obvious debate point.
    ...why is this deemed to be true?

    Until we all can get on the same page, this sort of shifty support structure will only go so far.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Could any of his achievements been done without going to the extreme, as he has? Yes, some could. (Belle Meade could have been easily handled by going to a public meeting... something he decided not to do...)
    You do realize the state has not a single reason to revoke his carry permit, but they did it anyways?

    Do you really believe that the "good ol boy" system will cater to his request to remove the law?

    There have been legal fights the better course of 5 years long to get them off the books using the method you described.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Can his actions still lead to a negative impact on your rights? Possibly. Depends on how and what he pushes in court. If done wrong, he can set legal precedent which we all could be saddled with.
    This argument has always irritated me. It's as if only those who have Alan Gura as immediate counsel, may pursue their individual rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by HvyMtl View Post
    Again, I am glad he finally got legal representation, as the representation may limit this concern of bad precedent. I do wonder if the representation is now across the board, as he had few cases going on at the same time...

    I DO hope Kwikrnu decides to better explain himself, than he has, so far, in multiple locations on the internet, by having a full on interview with Mr. Haas. As it seems, Mr. Haas may be the most neutral journalist he will find in Mid Tennessee on gun rights...
    I am likewise glad he got representation, but frankly, the guy is patient enough, and studious enough, to pursue matters on his own at the lower levels for sure.

    I think he doesn't want to talk to people who have been injurious to him for no other purpose than defending their insecurities.
    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...

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •