Open carry incident in Nashville gets me detained 2.5 hour at gun point carried AK-47

[Axeanda45]

When I read cocky post like your own or see stunts like the OP or Arizona dude pulled IMHO it leaves legal and responsible gun owners no choice but to consider you anti-gun.

So, let me get this straight.... You are saying here that my sticking up for something 100% legal, and Constitutional AND pro-2nd amendment makes me anti gun ?????

That does not compute at all. You sir have just proved that you have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE what rights are all about and what they stand for.

Did I anywhere condone what that man did? No I did not.

What I did was point out that the true law in this country (the Constitution) Affirms his right to do what he did.

Ever hear the saying "I dont agree with what you think or say or do, but I will fight to the death for your right to do so"? (cant remember it right, but it is something like that)

 

[HK4U]

So, let me get this straight.... You are saying here that my sticking up for something 100% legal, and Constitutional AND pro-2nd amendment makes me anti gun ?????

That does not compute at all. You sir have just proved that you have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE what rights are all about and what they stand for.

Did I anywhere condone what that man did? No I did not.

What I did was point out that the true law in this country (the Constitution) Affirms his right to do what he did.

Ever hear the saying "I dont agree with what you think or say or do, but I will fight to the death for your right to do so"? (cant remember it right, but it is something like that)

I don't think anybody here was trying to say that he did not have a right to have that particular gun and have it with him. The question was not really if it was legal but rather if it was the prudent thing to do. Again I feel from everything we have read that he was trying to be confrontational on purpose and in so doing set the wrong example for many people that are undecided about gun rights.

 

[JJFlash]

I don't think anybody here was trying to say that he did not have a right to have that particular gun and have it with him. The question was not really if it was legal but rather if it was the prudent thing to do. Again I feel from everything we have read that he was trying to be confrontational on purpose and in so doing set the wrong example for many people that are undecided about gun rights.

Yeah, I agree. While I did not actually classify and count the posts, my feeling is that, in general, his RIGHT to do what he did was supported by most who posted. However, his motivation and general demeanor seems suspect and we all worry about backtracking and losing hard-won legislative battles.

 

[Axeanda45]

Most everyone was attacking him for what he did, that is very clear. There are more rights affirmed in the bill of Rights than just the 2nd Amendment.

Just because YOU THINK it reflects badly on YOUR PET / FAVORITE Amendment, that gives you the right to attack someone for doing something protected by the same Constitution?

I was simply saying he had the right to do it and to stop attacking him.

THEN, I start getting attacked!

Geesh, nice forum you have here, no-one with other opinions allowed.

 

[HK4U]

Most everyone was attacking him for what he did, that is very clear. There are more rights affirmed in the bill of Rights than just the 2nd Amendment.

Just because YOU THINK it reflects badly on YOUR PET / FAVORITE Amendment, that gives you the right to attack someone for doing something protected by the same Constitution?

I was simply saying he had the right to do it and to stop attacking him.

THEN, I start getting attacked!

Geesh, nice forum you have here, no-one with other opinions allowed.

I am not sure who you think was "attacking" you. I know I wasn't. Some of the things you said in another post sounded like you were attacking others but that is neither here nor there. You think he did absolutely nothing wrong. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. Most of us feel what he did was not a good idea and we have a right to our opinion also. We will have to agree to disagree.

 

[HootmonSccy]

You think he did absolutely nothing wrong.

It reminds me of the politicians that get into trouble.. They do NOT say that they did nothing wrong.. They say they did not do anything illegal. You can think of many senators, etc that have said this...
Now although there statement is technically correct.. (they didn't do anything illegal) it doesn't mean what they did was right.. Just not against the law..
I would say the same for this situation.. he didn't do anything illegal, but he still should not have done it, at least the way he chose to do it..

 

[JJFlash]

Most everyone was attacking him for what he did, that is very clear. There are more rights affirmed in the bill of Rights than just the 2nd Amendment.

Just because YOU THINK it reflects badly on YOUR PET / FAVORITE Amendment, that gives you the right to attack someone for doing something protected by the same Constitution?

I was simply saying he had the right to do it and to stop attacking him.

THEN, I start getting attacked!

Geesh, nice forum you have here, no-one with other opinions allowed.

C'mon, man, get a grip. No one was attacking him or you that I saw. What I did see was a lot of disagreement with what he did. Like I told you before, he posted the situation, inviting opinions and he got 'em.

I didn't notice anyone tell him to STFU (ahem...) or to get off the site. Frankly, for the stunt he pulled, I thought the responses were pretty measured. Just me.

 

[IWLAFART]

Just faning the flames.......

You guys are just playing into his hands. He wants attention and you all are giving it to him.
Just adding fuel to the fire and it keeps growing. You are not going to change his weirdo mind.
I am a 2nd amendment supporter and a ccw permit carrier. I carry daily either my G19 or a LCP .380. I don't flaunt it.
I would not walk down the street beside him. He is not promoting our cause he is just supporting his.
Just my 2 cents

 

[chroode]

As a retired LE, and an avid open carrier, my $.02 is....

Rule Of Jiu Jitsu = No CHALLENGE, No RESISTANCE, No INJURY

I was all behind the OP, until I got to the part about the tape recorder. Then the orange paint.

1st, let me say, NO one else was there to witness how the OP acted/looked to the rangers questioning. As an LE, I am pretty confident that the OP acted "strange" enough to put these guys on high alert. Enough to warrant being held at gunpoint past the 1st friendly encounter of requesting the OPs pistol license.

2nd, the op was not just out for a leisurely stroll in the park with a weapon for protection. He PURPOSELY dressed and acted (walked around till he found a ranger) with the intent of causing a confrontation (challenge). He then argued with the ranger with the yes-no comments, and the announcement of the audio recording (resistance). He weirded these guys out enough for them to search, handcuff and hold him (injury). A news story was the result (injury to everyone who owns a gun).

The OP was not just another guy looking to protect himself under the 2nd Amendment, but an emotionally disturbed individual looking for 5 minutes of fame in his own twisted idea of fighting for his rights (he already has the right to open carry in the park???? So what exactly was he trying to prove?).

Further evidence of his mental embalance is evidenced by him now parading back and forth in front of the police station, again trying to provoke an encounter with authotities thus placing him back on television.

If I were the LE for that area I would apprehend him, confiscate his weapon(s), and have him held for psychatric evaluation. His actions are out of the norm of what is practiced by the majority of legal gun owners thus giving probable cause for this apprehension.

Again, it is not what he was doing, but how and why he is doing it. This guy is dangerous, like a fireman setting fires, so that he/she (yes a woman did this recently in the news) can be the hero by responding. This guy needs a psych eval NOW!!

 

[chroode]

You guys are just playing into his hands. He wants attention and you all are giving it to him.
Just adding fuel to the fire and it keeps growing. You are not going to change his weirdo mind.
I am a 2nd amendment supporter and a ccw permit carrier. I carry daily either my G19 or a LCP .380. I don't flaunt it.
I would not walk down the street beside him. He is not promoting our cause he is just supporting his.
Just my 2 cents

++++1

My point exactly. He's doing it for the media coverage/attention, not because he cares about his right to carry.

 

[IWLAFART]

AMEN TO THAT....you just confirmed my post.

 

[mwd]

I have the right to jump out of a plane without a chute or dive out of a vehicle into traffic but are those intelligent choices? Where you and I differ is I don't think he did anything that is pro 2nd Amendment. Not even close. This is nothing more than a self serving staged publicity stunt with provocation as its intention. Or $$$.

We are surrounded by a large number of people that despise guns and an even larger number that just 'tolerate' them. That leaves those of us that either love, or at least don't 'fear', guns as the smallest segment of our population. Of this smallest segment you will be hard pressed to find support for this kind of crap because in the process of exercising his rights he threatens ours.

State your opinion Axeanda because I too agree with the saying you reference. 'I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.' But don't jump down the throats of those of us that see this person as a threat to gun rights. Unfortunately there are 2 definitions to 'gun nut' and one is not good for the other. I didn't say he did anything illegal or unconstitutional, I said he did something that was boneheaded and dangerous on many levels.

 

[SA1911]

I said that my last post on this would be my last ,but I lied
So here it is, for those that think its about the 2 A .Lets not for get about the North Hollywood shoot out with the LAPD ware the suspects used AK47 that were converted to auto . That my fellow gun owners is what the general public sees because they don't know the difference between the two different guns, all they see is that they are the same ,and that makes them feel uneasy. And yes I have the Balls to do what he did, but I'M not looking to get my 15 sec of fame that way. We all have our own opinion on this but it don't need get into a mud sling,name calling event. This is what he likes to do is cause controversy.We all guilty of it even Me .And if this gets you up set at what I said then so be it I Don't Care ..

 

[Axeanda45]

I have the right to jump out of a plane without a chute or dive out of a vehicle into traffic but are those intelligent choices? Where you and I differ is I don't think he did anything that is pro 2nd Amendment. Not even close. This is nothing more than a self serving staged publicity stunt with provocation as its intention. Or $$$.

We are surrounded by a large number of people that despise guns and an even larger number that just 'tolerate' them. That leaves those of us that either love, or at least don't 'fear', guns as the smallest segment of our population. Of this smallest segment you will be hard pressed to find support for this kind of crap because in the process of exercising his rights he threatens ours.

State your opinion Axeanda because I too agree with the saying you reference. 'I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.' But don't jump down the throats of those of us that see this person as a threat to gun rights. Unfortunately there are 2 definitions to 'gun nut' and one is not good for the other. I didn't say he did anything illegal or unconstitutional, I said he did something that was boneheaded and dangerous on many levels.

Well, there you go again showing you have no clue what rights are....


Which one of you have the power of reading minds?

Do any of you have any camo gear? If you do, does that make you a wanna-be media hound too?

This country was founded on people fleeing persecution and to find freedom to do what they wanted to with their lives.

You act like your way of demonstrating or being active in our fight against the unjust laws is the only right way and condemn/attack anyone who does not go along with your view of how it should be done.

The Constitution Affirms OUR freedoms to do what we want, when we want, not just if it pleases the majority. (as long as we dont infringe on anothers rights while doing so)

Dont try to tell me that he harmed our fight, took us back a few steps, etc...... you have no clue what it did.

From what I have seen, no-one was shot, no-one is in jail, the mean terrible looking possessed orange weapon of mass destruction didnt go on any killing spree, The public and the responding officers got educated that it is legal to carry an AK-variant pistol, and that there is such a thing. How in the hell did this hurt anything?????????

 

[GregAllen]

Well, there you go again showing you have no clue what rights are....


Which one of you have the power of reading minds?

Do any of you have any camo gear? If you do, does that make you a wanna-be media hound too?

This country was founded on people fleeing persecution and to find freedom to do what they wanted to with their lives.

You act like your way of demonstrating or being active in our fight against the unjust laws is the only right way and condemn/attack anyone who does not go along with your view of how it should be done.

The Constitution Affirms OUR freedoms to do what we want, when we want, not just if it pleases the majority. (as long as we dont infringe on anothers rights while doing so)

Dont try to tell me that he harmed our fight, took us back a few steps, etc...... you have no clue what it did.

From what I have seen, no-one was shot, no-one is in jail, the mean terrible looking possessed orange weapon of mass destruction didnt go on any killing spree, The public and the responding officers got educated that it is legal to carry an AK-variant pistol, and that there is such a thing. How in the hell did this hurt anything?????????

It's pretty obvious that those posting to this forum know and understand what their rights are. It is also obvious that a few people posting to this forum take their rights for granted.

"How the hell did this hurt anything????????" As was said earlier, we just can't know that yet can we. The TN General Assembly is currently not in session. But has I tried to inform you earlier, they must reconsider the bill that allowed the OP to carry a handgun in a park due to the fact that a carry in restaurants provision was found to be vague and therefore unconstitutional in Tennessee. Parts or all of the bill will be modified, or removed from law. In other words, the jury is still out.

 

[festus]

You'll make a great lawyer someday

Well, there you go again showing you have no clue what rights are....


Which one of you have the power of reading minds?

Do any of you have any camo gear? If you do, does that make you a wanna-be media hound too?

This country was founded on people fleeing persecution and to find freedom to do what they wanted to with their lives.

You act like your way of demonstrating or being active in our fight against the unjust laws is the only right way and condemn/attack anyone who does not go along with your view of how it should be done.

The Constitution Affirms OUR freedoms to do what we want, when we want, not just if it pleases the majority. (as long as we dont infringe on anothers rights while doing so)

Dont try to tell me that he harmed our fight, took us back a few steps, etc...... you have no clue what it did.

From what I have seen, no-one was shot, no-one is in jail, the mean terrible looking possessed orange weapon of mass destruction didnt go on any killing spree, The public and the responding officers got educated that it is legal to carry an AK-variant pistol, and that there is such a thing. How in the hell did this hurt anything?????????

You are right he did not physically hurt anything or anyone but the bad press he gave legal gun owners did irrepairable damage to the confidence that the public has in us as a whole. Was he with in his rights? Yes was he using his noggin...NOPE! I take issue with those who chose to damage others by negligence. He falls into that category. Did you really read the news articles this guy generated? Being called a Gunman is not a good thing. Making other people feel uneasy not a good thing. Causing uniformed officers to call for back-up not a good thing.

He could have and should have reacted much differently. The whole taped conversation tells me he not only planned this in advance but wanted the confrontation. He does not warrant the respect that I reserve for every other gun toting patron of this board because he has not earned it. I definitely do not trust his judgement nor do I support his actions. I think the ranger acted accordingly. They detained a guy who was generating complaints and held him until they sorted out whether or not he was a threat to himself or others. They did not beat him, taze him or shoot him. KUDOS to the rangers for the restraint they showed while they sorted this thing out.

Again Gun Painted to look like toy = Bad Thing
Looking for confrontation and taping it for attention and possible future legal action=bad thing
wearing Camo and carrying an assault styled weapon in a public venue in light of all the active shooter situations that have taken place since Columbine=Bad Thing

Illegal=no
within his rights=yes
permanent damage to public opinion of gun owners=VERY BAD THING

 

[BillW]

I can understand the guy being stopped and questioned but, if true, I see no reason why someone presenting no threat needs to be forced into a prostrate position, and I have a hard time believing that any competent LEO isn't familiar with basic federal firearms rules. I for one do not think LEOs should be allowed to arrest without proper grounds.

Who cares if the thing is painted orange? Who says guns or flash suppressors can't be orange? I've always wondered who the idiots are that came up with the idea or "law", if that's the case, that toy guns need orange tips--are they stupid enough to think criminals won't modify the toys, or are they worried that cops are going to shoot kids as they're playing? I fail to see how having a weapon that resembles a toy is more "dangerous"; I would think it less alarming to anyone including LEOs.

Who cares if the guy is carrying an AK47 pistol versus some other weapon? Similarly, who the hell cares if the guy was wearing a camouflage jacket? It surprises and disappoints me to witness the same kind of ignorance in this forum that is rampant in the country.

 

[CCW357]

I have followed this this thread since it started.You are a Showman.... Hey, Look at me I have a Gun.... Are You on Acorns Payrolll. Something just Stinks....

 

[HK4U]

I can understand the guy being stopped and questioned but, if true, I see no reason why someone presenting no threat needs to be forced into a prostrate position, and I have a hard time believing that any competent LEO isn't familiar with basic federal firearms rules. I for one do not think LEOs should be allowed to arrest without proper grounds.

Who cares if the thing is painted orange? Who says guns or flash suppressors can't be orange? I've always wondered who the idiots are that came up with the idea or "law", if that's the case, that toy guns need orange tips--are they stupid enough to think criminals won't modify the toys, or are they worried that cops are going to shoot kids as they're playing? I fail to see how having a weapon that resembles a toy is more "dangerous"; I would think it less alarming to anyone including LEOs.

Who cares if the guy is carrying an AK47 pistol versus some other weapon? Similarly, who the hell cares if the guy was wearing a camouflage jacket? It surprises and disappoints me to witness the same kind of ignorance in this forum that is rampant in the country.

It surprises and disappoints me that you can not see this for what it is. A grandstand publicity stunt by a publicity hound that has nothing better to do with his time than try and tie up the police officers that very likely could be needed somewhere else. What this trouble maker needs is a psychological profile because he obviously is a few bricks shy a load. I am floored that anyone in their right mind would try and defend this nut job. Again, within his rights? Yes. A candidate for idiot of the year. Absolutely.

 

[CCW357]

It surprises and disappoints me that you can not see this for what it is. A grandstand publicity stunt by a publicity hound that has nothing better to do with his time than try and tie up the police officers that very likely could be needed somewhere else. What this trouble maker needs is a psychological profile because he obviously is a few bricks shy a load. I am floored that anyone in their right mind would try and defend this nut job. Again, within his rights? Yes. A candidate for idiot of the year. Absolutely.

Like said.... time to put this thread to bed, and I agree with HK4U, Get some help, before your next stunt and, some Officer who has just got out of training, Shoots you...