Defensive Carry banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Inviting A ?Stop and Frisk? By Openly Carrying

7K views 101 replies 35 participants last post by  JD 
#1 ·
Inviting A “Stop and Frisk” By Openly Carrying

The Volokh Conspiracy » Inviting A “Stop and Frisk” By Openly Carrying an AK-47 Pistol with a Thirty Round Clip In a Public Park: An Unusual Fourth and Second Amendment Case



Inviting A “Stop and Frisk” By Openly Carrying an AK-47 Pistol with a Thirty Round Clip In a Public Park: An Unusual Fourth and Second Amendment Case

The case is Embody v. Ward, handed down today by the Sixth Circuit in an opinion by Judge Sutton. It begins:

SNIP

For his troubles, Embody has done something rare: He has taken a position on the Second and Fourth Amendment that unites the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and the Second Amendment Foundation. Both organizations think that the park ranger permissibly disarmed and detained Leonard Embody that day, notwithstanding his rights to possess the gun. So do we.

SNIP
 
#3 ·
I hate these people. Regardless if he was 100% right in his ability to carry such a weapon in a public place why? I guess he went looking for trouble and found it. He is a bad spokesperson for the rest of us. All this wing nut did was scare people and make the rest of us look bad. I'm pretty sure that if he was carrying a Glock, the Ranger would have went up to him to possibly verify he had a permit per TN law and that would have been it. I hate people who challenge LE. They are just trying to do a very difficult job while attempting to make everyone happy.
 
#7 ·
"Stop him, measure the barrel, and send him on his way".

That's not what Lenny is looking for.
 
#5 ·
I said it in a recent thread on a similar topic and I'll say it again. HE'S AN IDIOT! Idiots like him do much more damage to our cause than good. He strapped on his AK47 pistol, which was only a half inch short of being illegal, and walk out of his door with the intent of causing trouble and ultimately having a run in with law enforcement. He wasn't arrested, simply detained until it was clear that the firearm was indeed legal. In this case it backfired on him. Should it have taken as long as it did to confirm the legal status of his weapon? No. But the fact remains that he went to that park with a HUGE chip on his shoulder, daring someone to knock it off. And when it was indeed knocked off, he decides to sue, which he knew all along he would do.

Sometimes I wish there were intelligence tests for gun owners. OK, I don't really believe that. But all gun owners should keep in the back of their minds that every time they walk out their door with a pistol strapped to their waists (or however each individual chooses to carry) they are representing all gun owners as far as the public is concerned. The RKBA is indeed a right. With that right comes much responsibility.
 
#6 ·
The RKBA is indeed a right. With that right comes much responsibility.
He harmed and threatened nobody. Once upon a time that was a basic pillar of justice and its execution via the law. It's long since become something else, with respect to firearms specifically and weaponry in general (as well as in many, many other areas).

He and others like him are taking some responsibility for ensuring this swept-under-the-rug thang we've been doing the past 100yrs is discussed, via the courts. Whether this guy ends up with the long-run impacts he's hoping for remains to be seen.

Personally, I'd bet the probabilities of improvements would be far better with, say, NRA-backed strategic attacks against the various restrictions that exist, targeted for maximum effect, with the full legal support of key cases by the NRA. In much the same way as the NAACP supported the strategic attack on the segregation issue via the courts. IMO, the one-off thing that individuals do ends up being far too easily destroyed or swept under the rug simply because it's an individual and not a "pack" effort.
 
#9 ·
I guess one good thing is if an AR or AK pistol scares the bejesus out of people when they see a 1911 they will accept it as one of those nice guns
 
#11 ·
Quite clearly this individual set out with the sole purpose of causing a confrontation. He got exactly what he wanted. Now he's hoping for a big payday from it. If the judge finds in his favor, I hope he receives an appropriate compensation. Something like damages in the amount of $1.00. After all, it's not about the money, it's the principal of the thing.
 
#15 ·
I have mixed feelings on this one. They could have approached him for a consensual conversation, but what reasonable suspicion did they have to detain him?

Also, cops bait citizens all the time to see whether or not they will break the law, so why is it OK for them to do it, but not for a citizen to do the reverse (I'm not saying I approve of baiting on either end, I am just saying why the double standard?)?

I don't want him to make a bundle of cash if that was his goal, but I do think he should have his attorney fees covered and lost wages compensated (for his time in court). Beyond that, I don't want him to make a cent.
 
#12 · (Edited)
I am all for open carry but what this guy did is wrong. It's no different than crying "fire" in a movie theater. Yes you have freedom of speech but with that comes some responsibility to not alarm or cause panic in public.

He set out to deliberately cause trouble and he got it. It didn't do our cause any good and probably harmed it with some people.
 
#14 ·
There are many things responsible gun owners can do to improve the "image of the gun" in society and this just wasn't one of them.

Obvious case of LEO baiting...
Obvious case of what a friend of mine would call a "BoucheDag".
 
#16 ·
There's more to be lost than won with this demonstration, IMO. We've made significant strides in exercising our rights and it should taken seriously and executed responsibly. His actions are sophomoric at best with little regard for "us", the larger community of gun owners. Legal action on his part? Horse puckey. He needs a trip behind the wood shed. When the Supreme Court once again reviews the Second Amendment, and eventually they will, will they be effected by images of ding bats with orange AK's going walk about amongst mothers with new babes? The power of public opinion is not a thing to underestimate.
 
#18 ·
I'm a huge supporter and believer in our 2nd Amendment right. It saddens me when someone from the ranks of the gun owner community does something like this.

As gun owners we don't have an agenda to make it legal to own and carry a firearm. The founders of this country put that in place with the 2nd Amendment.

This guy does have a right to carry a legal firearm. And I defend that right. But I don't take an AR15 to go squirrel hunting. Nor do I take a Daisy BB gun to hunt Elk. Common sense wasn't used in this instance. The cause to protect my 2nd Amendment right was dealt a blow by his act of social disregard.

I hate it when I have to support someone like this! But I cannot and will not let the gun grabbers start drawing lines through my 2nd Amendent rights! But if I ever got the chance to meet this guy one on one behind the woodshed I can promise you there would be lots of chopping and no wood for the stove!
 
#21 ·
We "CAN" do lots of thing but good comon sense tells us its not a good idea. I CAN crap my pants in public but I don't. I CAN wear a 3 piece suit to the pool but I don't.

As a gun owner I want get people on my side not scare them to the other side... I mean is their anything that can turn someone away from religion faster than someone shoving religion down their throat??
 
#24 ·
I'm going to look at this from a different perspective.


If his actions are not illegal, then why was he detained?

Are there varying degrees of "legal"? I think not.
Was he endangering anyone? Clearly not.

He was just a guy walking around with a pistol being openly carried... nothing more, nothing less.

Going back and reading some of the responses and original orignial posts, it's become painfully aware to me why we gunowners are in the the quandary that we are in. Most of us have been led into believing that if someone behaves in a way that we dont approve of, then it must be wrong.
Most of us have been brainwashed into accepting silly regulations of a right, a second amendment right,a right that is specifically outlined in the Constitution, as being perfectly acceptable.

We are used to being fed crumbs and accepting it as the norm, from our all knowing,enlightend masters that take care of us and "protect" us, because we are too simple, to uneducated and in many cases, too stupid to understand the big picture.

Some facts...
A Draco pistol, is in fact a short AK. The barrel is 11.5 inches long, well short of the legal minimum for it to be classed as a rifle.
It doesnt have a stock,the barrel is below the minumim 16" required length for a rifle, and by Federal standards it is a legal handgun. As such, it meets the criteria for a handgun in most states.

It may be that the man in question is in fact trolling for some attention. It may be that he is trying to make a point, one that goes all the way to the top, so that certain things may be clarifed by law. What ever his motive is, does it really matter?

If he was walking in the park, where open carry is legal, with a gun that is legal to do so, then why all of the excitement?

Lets look at what should have happened in an ideal world.

Mr. Embody is out for a stroll, and some soccer mom freaks out because this ugly dude is walking around with an even uglier gun. She calls the cops.
Cops get the dreaded "man with a gun" call. Its dreaded because you never know what's going on until you get there and sometimes it gets ugly. When an officer gets that call, they realize that they may be minutes away from having to kill someone.

Cop gets there,searches around and either finds the man with a gun or someone points him out. He approaches that individual in a maximum state of readiness.

He secures the gun and then interviews the owner. Within minutes, it should become apparent that Mr. Embody is acting in a legal manner, that the gun is legal, and that no breach of the law exists. He is given back his gun, and sent on his way.

It should have been a non issue. The reason that is became an issue is because of ignorance displayed at every level.


It was displayed by whoever made the call. They just saw a man with a gun. All he was doing was walking.
The dispatcher got the call and dispatched it to the police, in this case the park ranger. They just put out the info that they get.
The ranger got there and secured the gun.
He either didnt know it was legal,he was confused about it or he didnt care.
He arrested him, and utlimatley let him fight it through the courts.

In a court of law, personal feelings, like the many displayed here, arent supposed to color the facts,only the facts should matter.

Wheter we beleive it to be stupid foolish,dangerous,whether we mistakenly beleive it to be something that it is not, whatever feeling we may have, it should not matter if the issue was legal to begin with.

If the man was simply walking in the park with an openly displayed handgun and it was a legal activity, then there should be repercussions,no fines, no legal hassles,nothing at all.

Now,we get every people of every internet gunboard on the world wide web, talking about this issue for months on end. They talk and speculate and discuss about this thing, this very thing that was common place is most of this country, not so long ago, in a day when most people had enough common sense to know that it wasn't the gun that was the dangerous thing, it was the man that knew how to use it and in that day if someone called law to report that someone was wearing a gun and it was legal act, they would have been the ones that were chastised and ridiculed for being foolish.

It's weird how it all pans out. Here we are, most of us on this board pride ourselves in being pretty well versed when it comes to self defense and the law, ragging on some guy that was doing something legal....but we dont like it because of the gun that he is wearing and using much of the same arguments that the anti's use to limit our rights and freedoms.

And we wonder why things are the way they are.
Interesting.
 
#25 ·
It's weird how it all pans out. Here we are, most of us on this board pride ourselves in being pretty well versed when it comes to self defense and the law, ragging on some guy that was doing something legal....but we dont like it because of the gun that he is wearing and using much of the same arguments that the anti's use to limit our rights and freedoms.

And we wonder why things are the way they are.
Interesting.
Not ALL of us wonder HotGuns...

Good post; thanx.
 
#28 ·
If you don't see the difference between the "outskirts of town" and a public park, we are so far apart conversation is pointless.
 
#34 ·
Keep in mind how quick this conversation elevates between gun lovers..... preaching to the choir so to speak. Move this conversation to none gun owners or to people on the fence so to speak and one should be able to see how people we are discussing do not help our cause.

I will say again, if most of us saw a group of thug dressed black men doing the same, in your neighborhood or the park your childern are in... the conversation might be different
 
#38 ·
It's like the opposite of Bait Car. It's "Bait Gun" and its for the cops. Really stupid, but kinda hilarious. I doubt he'll win anything. I can think of much worse things that tax dollars are spent on, though.
 
#46 ·
I get so sick and tired of these discussions. What the guy did was stupid and harmful to those of us that exercise our rights to actually defend ourselves and not make political points. Then we get the inevitable "He was within the law, he did nothing wrong" defense. What is overlooked is the real damage that is done to our future ability to enjoy those rights. When enough people are offended by, or scared by, the idiots doing these things we're done. The 2nd Amendment can be amended out of our Constitution. Just ask the people in CA how their open carry demonstrations worked out. If these bags of feminine washing liquid get their way we'll all be in the same boat soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kb2wji
#49 ·
I get so sick and tired of these discussions. What the guy did was stupid and harmful to those of us that exercise our rights to actually defend ourselves and not make political points. Then we get the inevitable "He was within the law, he did nothing wrong" defense. What is overlooked is the real damage that is done to our future ability to enjoy those rights. When enough people are offended by, or scared by, the idiots doing these things we're done. The 2nd Amendment can be amended out of our Constitution. Just ask the people in CA how their open carry demonstrations worked out. If these bags of feminine washing liquid get their way we'll all be in the same boat soon.
I cannot force others to refrain from doing stupid things. What is the remedy if the person was not breaking any law?

Michael
 
#61 ·
"Stop and Frisk" or in other words a Terry stop.

LEO: "I see you're carrying a gun. I am going to search you for a gun."

Stop and chit chat, sure. Stop and frisk = violation of rights, absent probable cause and/or subsequent to arrest. Not knowing the law or being in possession of a tape measure does not constitute probable cause. Idiot or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mlr1m
#62 ·
I saw this unfold on OCDO with this guy's posts...this guy is a moron. I guess he didn't get enough attention as a child. He's young and stupid, and doesn't understand consequences; that his actions reflect on other folks who legally open carry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Floyd D. Barber
#67 ·
As I said before, this guy is an idiot! He walked out of his door with the intent of causing trouble. Look at his website. No reasonably sane person could conclude otherwise. Like I said before, with rights comes much responsibility. He wants to exercise his rights, but he certainly doesn't want to be responsible for his actions. Meaning he doesn't care whether his actions hurt the larger cause (and it does). People like him set us back quite a bit. Because of him, and people like him, we as gun owners will be forced to work even harder to overcome the negative stereotypes that people hold about us. And don't say it doesn't matter what other people think. Of course it does. In order to win the war, we need to change people's perceptions. His stupid acts fall right into the hands of the anti's.
 
#83 ·
And that is the problem. Who gets to say what your intent is. Until we develop our own version of Spok's Vulcan mind probe for side of the road brain scans the problem will exist.

Michael
No mind meld needed, just read any of his posts. If you can find a discussion board he hasn't gotten himself banned from. Seeking confrontation is what he lives for.
 
#68 ·
Does the 2nd amendment have any provisions prohibiting criminals and the mentally ill from bearing arms?
 
#71 ·
For me, what it boils down to is intent. I have defended open carriers who were simply carrying as part of their daily routine who were harassed for no reason. I have also vilified idiots with chips on their shoulders who's intent is obviously to create a scene, and that actually HOPE to draw the attention of law enforcement.
 
#73 ·
For me, what it boils down to is intent. I have defended open carriers who were simply carrying as part of their daily routine who were harassed for no reason. I have also vilified idiots with chips on their shoulders who's intent is obviously to create a scene, and that actually HOPE to draw the attention of law enforcement.
And that is the problem. Who gets to say what your intent is. Until we develop our own version of Spok's Vulcan mind probe for side of the road brain scans the problem will exist.

Michael
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top