Open carry incident in Belle Meade Tennessee 1-23-10 5:15-5:30pm

[GLOCK21GB]

imported post

I would have laughed if the pistol went off while the cop was fingering it & it blew off a portion of his anatomy, which portion I not care. he would have learned a real good lesson.....don't touch another mans gun:X.

 

[slowfiveoh]

imported post

Glock34 wrote:

I would have laughed if the pistol went off while the cop was fingering it & it blew off a portion of his anatomy, which portion I not care. he would have learned a real good lesson.....don't touch another mans gun:X.

Eh I think it best that we not wish anybody harm like that, or try at least, to not find joy in it.

I agree that he was obviously VERY unaware of how to operate it safely, and it is very evident that they are lucky it did not go off. It can be instantly understood by watching this, that a badge and firearms familiarization does not equal intelligence or comprehensive firearms mastery.

 

[kwikrnu]

imported post

Belle Meade ordinance 11-6-602 says it is illegal to carry a pistol or revolver, EXCEPT the army or navy pistol open in the hand.



TCA 39-17-1314(a) states that no city or municipality can regulate transport, possesion, etc of firearms unless their ordinance was in effect before April 8, 1986.



Belle Meade regulates the manner of firearm transportation and type which may be carried in their city. Their law is older than April 8, 1986. They do not require a permit in the ordinance. If they required a permit for carry in belle meade they would have made mention of it. The only requirement to carry a handgun in belle meade is that it be an army or navy and that it will be carried openly in the hand. There is no mention of a permit because no permit is needed. There was no State Permit system until only recently.


I know it will come up so I'll answer it now. TCA 39-17-1314 has nothing to do with parks. ANY ordinance before April 8, 1986 is valid in any city. They are all exceptions to preemption.

Here is a good opinion from a Metro Nashville Lawyer. There is no opinion concerning preemption exception from the AG that I have been able to find and I have requested many opinions with public records act requests. I have found no case law either.

If you still can't understand I won't be able to help you.



Here are the reports.

 

[caverat]

imported post

First off I would like to say you did a great job.
But the LEO also done a great job dealing with you as they did. It is our right to oc in accordance with our local laws and 2a as you did.
But this was not a good idea and reflects poorly on all of us! In an organized group your point would have been much more effective and a more positive statement. As you done it I see it as negative and I OC all day every day!
No I'm not LEO or anything of the sort nor any wish to be such! But I have several friends that are LEO as well as family. To put up with the B.S they do is tough enough but to have one guy just out making a point is reckless at best!
If you were truly OCing for self defense you would have had it holstered being a normal active citizen not just out to make a point acting like a redneck. Oh and I'm from the mountains and have more tact than that! I feel all you have done with this action is shown a negative light on all of us that hold 2a close at heart.
And to post that lady's personal info on the internet you really suck and I hope she sues you butt!!! :cuss:

 

[Rugerp345]

imported post

Sounds like she's on a mission to "get you under control" (part 3). LOL

 

[Rugerp345]

imported post

caverat wrote:

First off I would like to say you did a great job.
But the LEO also done a great job dealing with you as they did. It is our right to oc in accordance with our local laws and 2a as you did.
But this was not a good idea and reflects poorly on all of us! In an organized group your point would have been much more effective and a more positive statement. As you done it I see it as negative and I OC all day every day!
No I'm not LEO or anything of the sort nor any wish to be such! But I have several friends that are LEO as well as family. To put up with the B.S they do is tough enough but to have one guy just out making a point is reckless at best!
If you were truly OCing for self defense you would have had it holstered being a normal active citizen not just out to make a point acting like a redneck. Oh and I'm from the mountains and have more tact than that! I feel all you have done with this action is shown a negative light on all of us that hold 2a close at heart.

+ 1

And to post that lady's personal info on the internet you really suck and I hope she sues you butt!!!

Probably it's a matter of public record. Doubt she can do anything about it.

 

[Superlite27]

imported post

And to post that lady's personal info on the internet you really suck and I hope she sues you butt!!!

Hmmmmm. Maybe she could also sue the police department since they posted the audio recording of her giving it out on the internet as well.

 

[slowfiveoh]

imported post

Why all the hate as to checking to see if Officers know the laws they are expected to enforce? Why is there such a blatant double-standard here, that we as citizens feel obligated to abide by.

Some of the pointless posturing and rhetoric contained in those reports, is exactly the kind of indication of LEO bias and abuse. I did not see or hear a part where Mr. Embody stated that his HCP was in his back pocket, nor did he ever audibly or visibly give permission to have his person searched. This leads us to two possible scenarios:

#1. The retrieval of the handgun permit was prior to the video shown, therefore making the second pat-down arbitrary, unnecessary, and possibly flagrant.

#2. The initial pat-down was indeed the first one, and the Officer is blatantly lying on the report, in contention with video recorded evidence.


I also do not at any time hear Mr. Embody state that he would see anybody, "In federal court". Could somebody please point out time markers to these portions I am supposedly missing? If I am not, then that is blatant lie #2 within those Officer reports.

Another blatant lie is the Officers attempt to imply that Mr. Embody said specifically, "You must be a weapons expert to handle that very dangerous pistol".

That is not what he said, and is a horrendous, laughable, and flat out disgusting attempt to discredit him. The obviousness of this scenario was him trying to inform the officer that it was a blackpowder pistol, and it could be very dangerous to operate or check it without the proper firearms knowledge.

I highly doubt that the Officer in question would hop in and drive a tractor-trailer around the block without the appropriate training, just because he was certified to operate a police cruiser.

The comments about "Oh it's dangerous is it?" were fabricated by the female police officer, and Mr. Embody at no time stated the officer needed to be a firearms expert. Her statement is again, a lie. This type of behavior from law enforcement is intolerable.

At this point I would certainly move forward with litigation. Law Enforcement Officers need to be held to standards certainly far and above lying blatantly on reports.

 

[kwikrnu]

imported post

slowfiveoh wrote:

Why all the hate as to checking to see if Officers know the laws they are expected to enforce? Why is there such a blatant double-standard here, that we as citizens feel obligated to abide by.

Some of the pointless posturing and rhetoric contained in those reports, is exactly the kind of indication of LEO bias and abuse. I did not see or hear a part where Mr. Embody stated that his HCP was in his back pocket, nor did he ever audibly or visibly give permission to have his person searched. This leads us to two possible scenarios:

#1. The retrieval of the handgun permit was prior to the video shown, therefore making the second pat-down arbitrary, unnecessary, and possibly flagrant.

#2. The initial pat-down was indeed the first one, and the Officer is blatantly lying on the report, in contention with video recorded evidence.


I also do not at any time hear Mr. Embody state that he would see anybody, "In federal court". Could somebody please point out time markers to these portions I am supposedly missing? If I am not, then that is blatant lie #2 within those Officer reports.

Another blatant lie is the Officers attempt to imply that Mr. Embody said specifically, "You must be a weapons expert to handle that very dangerous pistol".

That is not what he said, and is a horrendous, laughable, and flat out disgusting attempt to discredit him. The obviousness of this scenario was him trying to inform the officer that it was a blackpowder pistol, and it could be very dangerous to operate or check it without the proper firearms knowledge.

I highly doubt that the Officer in question would hop in and drive a tractor-trailer around the block without the appropriate training, just because he was certified to operate a police cruiser.

The comments about "Oh it's dangerous is it?" were fabricated by the female police officer, and Mr. Embody at not time stated the officer needed to be a firearms expert. Her statement is again, a lie. This type of behavior from law enforcement is intolerable.

At this point I would certainly move forward with litigation. Law Enforcement Officers need to be held to standards certainly far and above lying blatantly on reports.

It is on the video when he asked if I had a permit I said yes and told him where it was. I told him before he searched me that I did not give permission to search my person.

I said something about federal court, but not specifically that I was going to sue them in Federal court. The officer said he had been to federal court twice before.

 

[Rugerp345]

imported post

I have reviewed again and again the video clips and the audio clips and checked out the link provided for the BM statutes. I hope that the members here can accept my apology for my previous comments which were made in haste and in ignorance. After reconsideration I can't see where Kwik did anything but follow the law to the letter.

Perhaps if the police and the citizenry feel that what Kwik did was somehow wrong, then they need to go in front of the city council and have that law amended or repealed rather than harassing people who are just following the law.

 

[caverat]

imported post

Superlite27 wrote:

And to post that lady's personal info on the internet you really suck and I hope she sues you butt!!!

 

Hmmmmm. Maybe she could also sue the police department since they posted the audio recording of her giving it out on the internet as well.

Good point and taken but it was very distasteful to post it for all us haters to have. Anyone wishing to find it could but why not be the bigger man. She was totally just being a trouble maker as the LEO were already on seen.

 

[caverat]

imported post

Nothing at all wrong with testing the LEO's familiarity with the laws. And no I see no reason to give in to them. But this was a little over the edge. Yes he was perfectly within his rights.
But so is hanging for horse theft in Idaho but they don't do it!
Any time someone pushes the limit of the law they just make more stupid laws. So the most likely out come of this incident will be another gun law!
We are far better off to educate than to run around proving points.
Now if kwikrnu Would have spent the time and effort to get a few people together and have a little march thing And put together some flyers with the law and there purpose for the march Then no foul. As it stands We all know he was totally with in his rights but the general public think both him and all gun owners are nut jobs.
IMO LEO are not the biggest problem the main steam media is the LEO are no different than the rest of us in the fact of all these stupid all guns are bad reports start to make some kinda since. Most don't take the time to realize that BG don't give a crap about the law. Kinda like locks only keep honest people honest! Ok some were probly picked on as kids so they wanna feel tough and important!
They don't stop to think that the guy who's gun you can see is most likely the GG. It's the one they cant see that will kill them. And the BG did not go down to the gun store and buy it no he paid twice the money and bought it from another BG Who knows were he got it not the gun store.
MY point is after babbling is that let's educate people rather than just trying to act like we are smarter than everyone else and can just do it cuz no one said we can't.
That is were the LEO problem comes from thats what many of there attitude is. I've had to deal with it and I'm sure I will more in the future. Even if that is there attitude you can get them understand they are of no use until it's to late only we can save and protect our selves and loved one's.

 

[kwikrnu]

imported post

I disagree, I think the police are the problem.

1. There was no complaint before the incident that I was a dangerous person.In fact the first complaint said I looked like a doctor and waved.

2.I'll post a couple more dispatch tapes. They show I was not acting strange. It shows they knew who I was.

5:13:34 1st complaint guy carrying a navy pistol

5:17:19 The guy pushing the limits

5:17:54 The guy we have a memo on

5:18:28 Appears to be a enlongated object



They who I was, they had a description of what I carried, and they knew I was wearing appropriate reflective clothing. Why was I stopped? I think to harrass me. In doing so I believe my rights were violated.

 

[Task Force 16]

imported post

caverat wrote:

Nothing at all wrong with testing the LEO's familiarity with the laws. And no I see no reason to give in to them. But this was a little over the edge. Yes he was perfectly within his rights.
But so is hanging for horse theft in Idaho but they don't do it!
Any time someone pushes the limit of the law they just make more stupid laws. So the most likely out come of this incident will be another gun law!
We are far better off to educate than to run around proving points.
Now if kwikrnu Would have spent the time and effort to get a few people together and have a little march thing And put together some flyers with the law and there purpose for the march Then no foul. As it stands We all know he was totally with in his rights but the general public think both him and all gun owners are nut jobs.
IMO LEO are not the biggest problem the main steam media is the LEO are no different than the rest of us in the fact of all these stupid all guns are bad reports start to make some kinda since. Most don't take the time to realize that BG don't give a crap about the law. Kinda like locks only keep honest people honest! Ok some were probly picked on as kids so they wanna feel tough and important!
They don't stop to think that the guy who's gun you can see is most likely the GG. It's the one they cant see that will kill them. And the BG did not go down to the gun store and buy it no he paid twice the money and bought it from another BG Who knows were he got it not the gun store.
MY point is after babbling is that let's educate people rather than just trying to act like we are smarter than everyone else and can just do it cuz no one said we can't.
That is were the LEO problem comes from thats what many of there attitude is. I've had to deal with it and I'm sure I will more in the future. Even if that is there attitude you can get them understand they are of no use until it's to late only we can save and protect our selves and loved one's.

Rather than staging some sort of demonstration to make a point, it would have been more prudent to first find out if the city ordinance was actaully enforced. Since we now know, after the fact, that it isn't the next step would be to petition the city of Belle Meade to either repeal the ordinance or amend it to reflect what the city does enforce re carry of handguns within the city of Belle Meade.

kwik didn't want to go that route. Why aren't we asking him, WHY NOT?

If Belle Meade doesn't enforce this old ordinance, what reason would they have to want to keep it on the books? I'm quite sure that there are more residents in BM that hold HCP (Handgun Carry Permit - required in TN to carry CC or OC) and I doubt that they carry old Army/Navy black powder handguns "in hand." If fact, it appears that none of them do, since the officers considered Mr. Embody's mode of carry ODD. Did you not here Officer Goins ask him if he had a holster for his handgun?

Another pertinant question to be asked. Why would LEO need to know about an ordinance that isn't enforced?

Those of you that have formed a cheerleading section for kwik need to step back and really think about what kwik has been doing. I personally don't believe his actions or motives behind them are in our best interest.

 

[kwikrnu]

imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:

Rather than staging some sort of demonstration to make a point, it would have been more prudent to first find out if the city ordinance was actaully enforced. Since we now know, after the fact, that it isn't the next step would be to petition the city of Belle Meade to either repeal the ordinance or amend it to reflect what the city does enforce re carry of handguns within the city of Belle Meade.

kwik didn't want to go that route. Why aren't we asking him, WHY NOT?

If Belle Meade doesn't enforce this old ordinance, what reason would they have to want to keep it on the books? I'm quite sure that there are more residents in BM that hold HCP (Handgun Carry Permit - required in TN to carry CC or OC) and I doubt that they carry old Army/Navy black powder handguns "in hand." If fact, it appears that none of them do, since the officers considered Mr. Embody's mode of carry ODD. Did you not here Officer Goins ask him if he had a holster for his handgun?

Another pertinant question to be asked. Why would LEO need to know about an ordinance that isn't enforced?

Those of you that have formed a cheerleading section for kwik need to step back and really think about what kwik has been doing. I personally don't believe his actions or motives behind them are in our best interest.

You think if I carried the AK pistol they wouldn't have cited me for violation of their city ordinance? You're living in a dream world.

 

[Task Force 16]

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

Task Force 16 wrote:

Rather than staging some sort of demonstration to make a point, it would have been more prudent to first find out if the city ordinance was actaully enforced. Since we now know, after the fact, that it isn't the next step would be to petition the city of Belle Meade to either repeal the ordinance or amend it to reflect what the city does enforce re carry of handguns within the city of Belle Meade.

kwik didn't want to go that route. Why aren't we asking him, WHY NOT?

If Belle Meade doesn't enforce this old ordinance, what reason would they have to want to keep it on the books? I'm quite sure that there are more residents in BM that hold HCP (Handgun Carry Permit - required in TN to carry CC or OC) and I doubt that they carry old Army/Navy black powder handguns "in hand." If fact, it appears that none of them do, since the officers considered Mr. Embody's mode of carry ODD. Did you not here Officer Goins ask him if he had a holster for his handgun?

Another pertinant question to be asked. Why would LEO need to know about an ordinance that isn't enforced?

Those of you that have formed a cheerleading section for kwik need to step back and really think about what kwik has been doing. I personally don't believe his actions or motives behind them are in our best interest.

You think if I carried the AK pistol they wouldn't have cited me for violation of their city ordinance? You're living in a dream world.

I see you still won't address the issues I've repeatedly raised, about going before the city council and requesting that they repeal or amend their ordinance.

After viewing your performance in the dash cam video, perhaps you wouldn't be the best candidate to represent gun carriers, at a city board meeting. You havemuch of a "smart ass"attitude

 

[caverat]

imported post

Task force 16 you went the same place I was trying to go you just stated it much better. :? Your idea of approach is the point I was trying to get across! That and if a thousand people do something right it only takes one to screw it all up!!!

 

[kwikrnu]

imported post

caverat wrote:

Task force 16 you went the same place I was trying to go you just stated it much better. :? Your idea of approach is the point I was trying to get across! That and if a thousand people do something right it only takes one to screw it all up!!!

If knowing the law and following it to the letter is screwing up I'd hate to see what you would say to someone who breaks the law. :shock:

 

[caverat]

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

I disagree, I think the police are the problem.

1. There was no complaint before the incident that I was a dangerous person. In fact the first complaint said I looked like a doctor and waved.

2. I'll post a couple more dispatch tapes. They show I was not acting strange. It shows they knew who I was.

5:13:34 1st complaint guy carrying a navy pistol

5:17:19 The guy pushing the limits

5:17:54 The guy we have a memo on

5:18:28 Appears to be a enlongated object

 

They who I was, they had a description of what I carried, and they knew I was wearing appropriate reflective clothing. Why was I stopped? I think to harrass me. In doing so I believe my rights were violated.

Sorry I missed these for my last post. I'm really mixed on if your rights were in fact violated? They had A 911 complaint that I would think give them reason to stop you. But it seams like thats what you wanted to happen?? Just looks an awfully lot like you were baiting this and they knew who you were makes me think this was not your first stunt to get attention. Your new posts have only proven my point all the more! I dont think your a bad guy but miss guided a bit maybe.

 

[caverat]

imported post

knowing it is not the problem the way you went about it was! Law wise you did a stand up job