Defensive Carry banner

TN Man's Permit Revoked: 1st Fall Out @ Post 110-MERGED

15K views 196 replies 66 participants last post by  Scar270 
#1 ·
Man Who Carried Gun In Park Has Permit Revoked
Gun Rights Supporter Attempts To Set Record Straight
Reported by Heather Jensen

POSTED: 9:24 pm CST March 13, 2010
UPDATED: 12:01 am CST March 14, 2010

NASHVILLE, Tenn. –– You may not know Leonard Embody's name, but you might know his recent troubles with the law and guns.


"I'm a private person," Embody said. "I didn't want to be in the spotlight. I didn't want my name in the news reports."

Embody's name and story have been appeared in news reports and online blogs for months. He was thrust into the media spotlight last December when he carried an AK-47-type pistol into Radnor Lake State Park.

"It wasn't modified in any way except for a sling, and I had painted the tip orange on it," he said.

His gun-carry permit was current and the gun was legal, but park rangers stopped Embody and detained him for three hours. He was later released with no charges filed.

The next month, he made headlines again when he took his handgun on a walk down Belle Meade Boulevard, in full compliance with the law.

"The only way you can carry the handgun is to carry it openly in your hand," Embody said.

Once again, he was stopped, searched, and released.

Since then, Embody has filed a federal lawsuit against the Radnor Lake State Park ranger. And on Friday, he received a certified letter from the Tennessee Department of Safety stating his gun carry permit was revoked.

"There was a material likelihood that I was a risk to the public," Embody said of the letter.

Embody doesn't consider himself an gun rights activist; but he strongly believes gun legislation is flawed, often outdated, vague, or contradictory.

"I'd like to see that here in Tennessee we have the right to bear arms and that right shall not be infringed," he said.

Regardless of his thoughts on gun rights, his run-ins with authorities, or the talk around town, Embody said he's not trying to make a political statement.

"I always carry a gun. I usually carry open carry. I believe open carry is a deterrent to crime," he said.

Embody will appeal the decision to revoke his gun carry permit.

Attorneys on both sides of his lawsuit are scheduled to meet in April.
 
See less See more
#162 ·
A man that goes around looking for trouble; will usually find some.

Gotta wonder just how much his actions actually hurt our cause by such negative publicity.:twak:

There's a right way and a wrong way to make a point. IMO opinion he chose the wrong way.
 
#163 ·
Does any one here think requiring toys to have an orange end really does anything? I'm just glad that this time when the police ran into someone with their gun painted with an orange tip, it was just an attention nut, and not a real criminal, using it to give the police a false sense of security.
 
#164 ·
in an unsafe manner = in his hand
in an unsafe location = outside a holster
in an unsafe condition = ??old revolver??

Is it really that hard to understand that this guy was maybe a little out of line by carrying a pistol in his hand while walking down the street?

As for the home builder analogy it makes absolutely no sense...

For a private residence framing walls of a house the studs are normally 16" apart and for structures for which there is no second floor like a garage or shed they can be up to 24" apart. This is not a "law" whereby your structure would be torn down. Building codes are checked with design at the time you obtain a building permit. If you get the OK and you do not build to the approved plans then you may be subject to penalty or fine not because of the structure itself but because of the permit terms. You will then have to fix it. Permits are issued to make sure that building in the location is safe and to deal with logistical issues such as underground services and height restrictions if applicable. Most structures that are approved for the type of building that is being erected are only reviewed by an inspector at the time of sale or if requested by the owner. The only time they can tear the structure down without permission is if you build in the "no no zone" translation is if its outside your property or within a certain distance to a structure/property line/etc. It's how it worked here in my state, and county when I renovated several rooms in my parents house, built a pole barn, garage, and pool deck. Deal with it.

Of course for commercial building and professional home building companies the information above may or may not fully apply, with other or additional restrictions. See local Department of Building Inspections for terms and conditions, Void where prohibited.

Bottom line is if you are to get your structure inspected and it does not meet code you will be required to fix it. That's the way it is and has nothing to do with gun laws or open carry.
 
#166 ·
re: Razor

in an unsafe manner = in his hand
As prescribed by law.

in an unsafe location = outside a holster
Again, as prescribed by law

in an unsafe condition = ??old revolver??
Doesn't mean it wasn't in good working condition. We seem to know nothing about whether it was loaded, cocked and loaded, or merely displayed as required by law.

What some of you are saying is that if the law says you have to do something, and you do it, it is perfectly ok for the law to turn around and then accuse you of doing wrong by obeying the law. That is a ridiculous position to take.

It is like taking a legal tax deduction and then being accused of being a tax cheating.


As for the home builder analogy it makes absolutely no sense...
It was an attempt to show that it is ridiculous to say someone who obeys the law has committed a wrong. The specifics of bldg code are irrelevant. That was an analogy to illustrate a point. No need to debate bldg code specifics.

Look, I don't know the guy and couldn't care about him one way or the other. What I do care something about is the notion that obeying the law should not get someone into trouble or get them ridiculed.

What people are responding to here is the concern, "what will the anti-s think of us because of what this fellow did."

That is not something we have control over and we already know what they think of us regardless of what one guy did---which was legal.

If I understood the town's response correctly, it was to pass a law (or did they merely propose to pass a law?) in violation of the state's preemption statute. Tell me, who should be hanging their head in shame? The mayor and the city attorney, I think. They are the ones who are openly and deliberately breaking the law and being defiant of the authority of the State of TN.
 
#168 ·
A lot of people have defended his painting the tip of his Draco (AK-47 variant) pistol orange by saying it's not illegal. But is it responsible? What if a child found it? You don't think they'd mistake it for a realistic toy? Especially considering the orange tip?

Also, from now on, any time a police officer shoots a child with a toy gun in his hand, he can point to this nut and say, "Well, that guy had a REAL gun with an orange tip. How did I know the kid didn't have the same?"

I understand his logic (I guess) of carrying the old pistol down the street in his hand, but did it have to be loaded? Would it have made a legal difference? He wasn't carrying it for self defense, but to challenge the law, so did it make a difference? He should have known they would have at least temporary confiscated it, at least while they talked to him. I wouldn't assume LEO's are familiar with old style pistols. In his video, he even expresses concern because it's loaded and that he wasn't sure if the officer knew what he was doing. He could have made his point with an unloaded pistol, and reduced the risks.

Just my opinion.
 
#173 ·
A lot of people have defended his painting the tip of his Draco (AK-47 variant) pistol orange by saying it's not illegal. But is it responsible? What if a child found it? You don't think they'd mistake it for a realistic toy? Especially considering the orange tip?

Also, from now on, any time a police officer shoots a child with a toy gun in his hand, he can point to this nut and say, "Well, that guy had a REAL gun with an orange tip. How did I know the kid didn't have the same?"
Irregardless of this guy, to assume a gun with an orange tip isn't real is already a really stupid idea. I can't really believe that anyone thinks a splash of orange paint can make a bit of difference. The orange tip on toy guns is just another one of the asinine laws that makes people feel good.
 
#172 ·
Haven't read 9 pages of this thread - but good posts Hopy
 
#184 ·
re: Tinkerinwstuff



Thank you. 'preciate it.
 
#174 ·
The best way to have a law amended is to follow the obviously 100 or so year old outdated law to the letter and sit back and wait for the folks around you to get jacked up and demand an amendment. Case in point.

Why carry a weapon as he did? For attention. Does it help the OC laws for any state? No way, if anything it hurt um big time. There is no reason for this dudes actions. It's not a war zone out there, all he did was make himself and most all OC folks look like quacks in the eyes of the folks that for what ever reason just don't get the CC thing.

What's the reason for such an act? How does that help our 2nd amendment cause? Cause it's legal we should do it until it causes so much anguish that the powers that be put a stop to it at the behest of their constituency. Where's the bright more there.

It's our right to open carry...Pleeeze. Sure you have the right to OC, but OC a 50 cal is gonna draw unwanted attention and seem fanatical to the folks around you and for what cause, cause you can. You have the right to pee in the woods too, but let someone who gets offended by it see ya and see what happens.

Anyone who would think that this guy was right in his approach is part of the problem. If a law has been passed that directly pertains to our society and can be easily applicable to our current timeline, the yes we should be able to effectively exercise that right to the fullest. If that law is clearly outdated and has no real significance or place, then it should be stricken and avoided. It's called the world we live in and like it or not, you gotta deal with it on terms that can make sense to the average person; not with some obscure law written way back when for what ever reason.

If you saw some dude walking around in a parka in the middle of summer 90+ degrees, wouldn't ya think the guy to be a little off, or at least weird, or at least up to something? Where's the difference between some dude like that and some dude loaded like it's bagdad and he's gathering intel? Just goofy; and I think the cat got what he deserved. Anytime you can give the gun control law makers an opportunity to rewrite a law regarding guns, you may just end up with more gun control than you either wanted or like. In my 40 years I've found and believe that, its best to leave sleeping dogs alone.

Like it or not; in this day and age the powers that be are gonna be watching goofballs like this more and more; if they make large waves as apposed to smaller less offensive ones, they'll bring down the hammer of change faster and harder and we will lose the battle for our rights to CC. Rant off!

GBK
 
#176 ·
The best way to have a law amended is to follow the obviously 100 or so year old outdated law to the letter and sit back and wait for the folks around you to get jacked up and demand an amendment. Case in point.
Or he could go to a town council meeting, make his point in a polite, on point statement, then respectfully ask the town to join the 21st century...

But it is more fun to run around with a gun...
 
#175 ·
As the story continues.......tune in tomorrow for another episode of "The Nut Who Lost His Permit". GEEZ this is just like a soap opera. Don't forget tune in tomorrow for the latest news.
 
#180 ·
As mentioned earlier, just because I can do something doesn't mean I should. Common sense sure goes along way too. Remember this, if you walk like a duck and talk like a duck, you might not be a duck...........but don't get your feathers ruffled if people keep mistaking you for a duck.


Let's take this situation and recontext it. You're out in a public park with your kids/grandkids/family/etc. A group of men, all carrying same said pistol, but have matching bandanas, baggy pants, tattoos on their face and neck come strolling through the park. Be honest, is your first thought, "Huh, good to see some guys exercising their open carry right, as well as freedom of expression. I don't agree with their appearance, but I respect their right to do so........"? Of course not. I've been around this forum, I can hear the terms "thug", "gangbanger" and "scum" flying all over the place now.

Truth be told, you don't know that. They may very well be a group of guys, fond of ink and matching clothing styles who exercise their gun rights. You go off the "appearance" of things. Look at it another way. Same story different verse. A guy, dressed in a hoodie, with same said gun comes walking by you in your car in Wal-Mart parking lot. You've got several people you know that are shopping inside. I know what you're thinking, "Good to see a fellow 2nd amendment advocate out and about. Plus, you gotta appreciate the fashion sense of hoodie.", right? You're comfortable knowing this guy is headed into where people you care about are? But he's legal.........

The man may have been legal, but that doesn't make it right either. On a lighter note, I've got a good size gut now. It's legal for me to sit out in my yard without a shirt, but I've found it prudent to not do so. :)
 
#185 ·
Wildcat, this is a great discussion, but I'm not sure I buy into the fact that this guy gives them that much ammunition. The anti's arguments tend to revolve around the fact that because we have guns we are going to shoot someone. The more times the people who are neutral, see people with guns not shooting someone, the less effective their arguments are.

The whole strategy of taking someone who doesn't like guns, but isn't a hard core anti, out shooting, so they realize that holding a gun doesn't turn them into a mass murderer.

I agree this wasn't the most appropriate way to fight this law, at least not the place to start, but some on here are all for him having his carry permit revoked. I don't think we should be cheering a move like that, because next time it might be a law that we are trying to challenge, and went through all the right channels, but still couldn't get to happen.

I don't like when the law starts to be heavy handed, especially when the guy was following the law.

When we had our registration coming in during the 90's, we had people trying to fight it on every level, and we were being completely ignored by the government, so we had people trying to get arrested for unregistered firearms to publicly challenge the law in court. The people took stripped recievers, the part we have to register, to the protests, and when the police arrested them, they never laid charges under the new law, that they were protesting, they intentionally left that off so they couldn't take it to court, instead charging them with having a firearm at a public meeting, as if the intention of that law was to deal with people who have a chunk of steel.

We have had people here serve jail sentences for taking a couple 5 gallon pails of grain across the border and donating to a Montana 4H club in protest of our Wheat Board monopoly.

You guys are maybe lucky down there to not be dealing with that level having the police push the political agenda, but if you allow guys like this to go down without any support, it will get worse.

You can think he's a loon, thats fine, but a loon or not he doesn't deserve to have his carry permit revoked for following the law, if there is more reasons to do it, let them pull it on legitimate reasons.
 
#186 ·
As belligerent as this guy’s actions have been, and as much as disagree with his tactics, what is the material difference between his stunts and the folks carrying around in Cali? Both trying to prove a point and being “out there” and “in your face” with the sheeple to make a statement. Let me stress, I don’t agree with his stunts and think it does hurt the image of responsible gun owners, but the fact that no laws were broken really makes his stunts no different than what the folks in Cali have been doing—just more shocking.
 
#187 ·
The guy did this for a reason, and almost, got the reaction he wanted. He was detained, not arrested. After repeatedly using bad judgement, the Police did what they were allowed by the law to do and stated he was a "possible" danger and requested that his permit be pulled. The State did what it felt was best to do and pulled is permit, which is allowed in the law to do. He now can appeal to get it back, which is in the law to do.

What if the Police did nothing, and the State did nothing, and this guy goes postal at a Park and kills several people? AND if you read all his posting on SEVERAL forums, it sounds possible.

The Police, and the state would have a HUGE number of lawsuites against them. The media would have a field day. They were in a no win situaition.

They did what the law allowed, and he if he can canvince a Judge he is OK he can get it back. The law works to protect the public, and individual.

Just remember he is the one that instigated this.
 
#188 ·
Excellent post! :congrats:
"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure " is the most viable option open to the rule of law (the legal systems first obligation is to the well being of the state in general, the individual is second) and they followed that course...no surprise there.
 
#191 ·
My opinion of this guy is poor. I mean he isn’t doing this stuff for the greater good he is doing it for himself and to be in the spot light. Most reasonable people know that to get a law fixed or to bring it to the attention of the people making the laws is to voice your opinion, not to go out with the sole intention of getting into a confrontation with LEOs. I for one try and avoid LEO confrontation (not that I am doing anything wrong or afraid of them) as much as possible. If the state feels that this guy's blatant, confrontational attitude is grounds to revoke his CCL then so be it. If he is willing to get into a confrontation with LEOs then can I assume that he would be willing to get into a confrontation with anybody? I can not fathom that the LEOs in this case were just trying to harass him, he was after all walking down the street with a loaded handgun in his hand, law or not that is just stupid. I am not comfortable with someone with no common sense even owning a gun let alone carrying one on his person. JMO
 
#192 ·
My opinion of this guy is poor. I mean he isn’t doing this stuff for the greater good he is doing it for himself and to be in the spot light. Most reasonable people know that to get a law fixed or to bring it to the attention of the people making the laws is to voice your opinion, not to go out with the sole intention of getting into a confrontation with LEOs. I for one try and avoid LEO confrontation (not that I am doing anything wrong or afraid of them) as much as possible. If the state feels that this guy's blatant, confrontational attitude is grounds to revoke his CCL then so be it. If he is willing to get into a confrontation with LEOs then can I assume that he would be willing to get into a confrontation with anybody? I can not fathom that the LEOs in this case were just trying to harass him, he was after all walking down the street with a loaded handgun in his hand, law or not that is just stupid. I am not comfortable with someone with no common sense even owning a gun let alone carrying one on his person. JMO
Good post!
 
#193 ·
All Lenny is trying to do is get someone to "wrong" him so he can sue. He doesn't give a crap about YOUR or MY rights...he's only trying to get rich doing something that is legal, but stupid as the day is long.
Just because he claims he's doing this for "our" rights, don't be fooled. I've spoken to people who know him personally...he's out for a payday...nothing else.
 
#194 ·
Even if thats all he's out for, be careful about willfully letting him be thrown under the bus, once someone has gotten away with doing it to him, they may come for you next.

If they can come up with legitimate concerns and deal with him fine, but just because the guy is an idiot, doesn't mean he doesn't have the same rights as the rest of us.

Maybe this guy really is an idiot, but every time some up here gets arrested trying to challenge a bad law, the police and media drag them through the mud and do everything they can to make the person look like a nut job, so they can get the exact kind of reaction towards that person, as this guy is getting from here.

I don't know this guy from Adam, it sounds like many of you are familiar with him, and maybe this is not a snow job by the powers that be, I'm just wanting to toss out there that it does happen, I don't want to see any of you fall for the sort of BS that seems to work so well up here, either on this issue or any others.

From hanging out a bit here, I don't see you guy's being prime candidates for a snow job anyway, but it pays to be vigilant.
 
#195 ·
He hasn't been arrested...only detained and investigated. He got his feelings hurt and now wants to sue anyone and everyone.
His situation has already been brought up by the antis in our state gov while we're trying to get our right to carry in places that serve booze for onsite consumption back. We don’t need his type pushing the legal boundaries right now. Every time he comes up in the local news…we look that much bad and it’s going to be that much harder to get our reps behind us.
 
#196 ·
Even if thats all he's out for, be careful about willfully letting him be thrown under the bus, once someone has gotten away with doing it to him, they may come for you next.

If they can come up with legitimate concerns and deal with him fine, but just because the guy is an idiot, doesn't mean he doesn't have the same rights as the rest of us.

Maybe this guy really is an idiot, but every time some up here gets arrested trying to challenge a bad law, the police and media drag them through the mud and do everything they can to make the person look like a nut job, so they can get the exact kind of reaction towards that person, as this guy is getting from here.

I don't know this guy from Adam, it sounds like many of you are familiar with him, and maybe this is not a snow job by the powers that be, I'm just wanting to toss out there that it does happen, I don't want to see any of you fall for the sort of BS that seems to work so well up here, either on this issue or any others.

From hanging out a bit here, I don't see you guy's being prime candidates for a snow job anyway, but it pays to be vigilant.
The thing is most of us on here are not like this guy. And yes him being an idiot should hinder his chances of carrying a gun around with him. People do get railroaded or "thrown under the bus" all the time but in this case (JMO) he deserved what he got. If he can pull his head out of his nether region and get his CCL back then fine, but if he cant then I wouldn’t want to be walking around any town or city this guy is in. That’s my .02 cents.
 
#197 ·
I certainly agree that those on hear do not sound like this guy, just adding the perspective that sometimes you have to defend the nut jobs in order to maintain your own rights.

ie the theory of defending someones right to speak, no matter how much you disagree with what they have to say.

If the police find legitimate grounds to remove his permit, then fine, but if they use things that could also be used against any of the rest of you, then that is a bad thing, no matter how dumb that individual may be.

Thats why my only concern was that they were claiming him a danger for following the law to a T, no matter how stupid the law. That was only part of the report, and the rest may be enough to legitimately pull his permit.

I realize you guys are in a much different and better world then us up here, I just don't want to see any of you fall for the same sort of infighting and traps that so many fell for up here.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top