Skip to comments.embody v ward petition for writ of certiorari 12-516
Posted on 11/02/2012 7:03:43 AM PDT by kwikrnu
Will SCOTUS elect to hear it?
(Excerpt) Read more at waronguns.blogspot.com ...
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. When even Alan Gura thinks what you did was stupid, it tells you that you were definitely on the wrong track.
SCOTUS will laugh at you.
Open carry of handgun in a place that specifically allows for such open carry is not stupid.
Alan Gura is anti-open carry. He would restrict your right to carry handguns he does not approve of.
Just look at his sign up date, troll.
Mar. 27, 2010 is my sign up date.
His date he is the troll.
Uh huh... sure... the world is against you... After all, everyone paints an AK47 draco pistol orange and prances through the parks looking to instigate encounters with the police.
Hint... when everyone, including some of the most successful pro-gun advocates in the country think what you are doing is insane, in might be a clue that it is.
HA! That’s rich. You think I’m the troll,as opposed to the person who was banned from virtually every major gun discussion board on the internet after pimping these antics?
Check out Glocktalk, AR15.com, tngunowners.com, and opencarry.org, I guess those boards are all anti-gun too? Right?
There are a lot of people who think that this nonsense hurts our cause:
Indeed, just the first few pages of Google results for “Kwikrnu banned” are quite revealing.
“There are a lot of people who think that this nonsense hurts our cause:” big deal the only question is did he break a law or did the police violate his rights. This is supposed to be a nation of laws not of men. I have no use for people who whine about feelings or being offended. It is the law and our rights that matter.
After reading the court rulings, I believe that this case will not be granted Certiorari, as the decision will be very limited in its scope. I say this because it seems to revolve around the issue of whether the police has a right to stop this individual to investigate the legality of his weapon, and to a lesser extent, was the 2.5 hour delay to determine the legality of the weapon an unreasonable one?
I don’t think this will have a far reaching effect, except to perhaps encourage the police to understand the legal criteria of the definition of a handgun in Tennessee so that it does not take 2.5 hours to figure it out.
It never hurts to push back, but he should not expect a good outcome in this case, IMHO.
Best of luck to him anyway.
I agree with you assessment of the case. 2.5 hours to measure a barrel seems long to me and you but to a brain dead park ranger I guess not. And yes we do need to push back.
Someone concerned about the civil rights of the citizen could have resolved this problem in a number of ways less intrusive than a felony stop.
The ID of the citizen was established with the concealed carry permit, including his address. If there was a question of whether the weapon was a legal “handgun”, the Ranger could have taken a picture of the weapon and sent it on to the “experts”; had it been “illegal”, they could have visited him. Or he could have simply asked to examine the weapon, and discussed the legality of the weapon with the citizen (who would have been more than willing to do so).
But no ... because the weapon looked “ugly”, and the person carrying it was deliberately pushing limits by openly carrying an “ugly gun” -— the citizen was labeled as “suspected of carrying an illegal weapon”; and “officer safety” justified a “felony stop”.
This was outright harassment, resulting from “law enforcement” attitudes that “people who carry guns are bad.”
This is a very poor article. Who is Leonard Embody, I have never heard of him before, and why should I care about his case? Based on this article I don’t care whether or not SCOTUS hears his case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.