The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 2, 2013, 06:54 PM   #26
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDandy
And you don't think that should include being able to provide the permit prior to arrest,...
The point is that Embody didn't, nor would he identify himself or cooperate in any way. Had he produced the proper paperwork and properly identified himself, he most likely would not have been arrested.

Apparently you took this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
...It is an affirmative defense if the owner can prove the items are legally registered, but that's a defense made in court,...
entirely out of context.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old August 2, 2013, 09:36 PM   #27
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
Quote:
Your logic can be extended to any number of things
Not necessarily. The problem is the way in which the law is worded.

Basically X is illegal unless the defendant can prove Y. That sets the burden of proof on the defendant. Some states' carry laws are worded like that. In those states, concealed carry is a crime, but it shall be a defense if the person has a permit exempting them from prosecution.

That's different than a law that just reads "concealed carry is permitted if the citizen has a permit issued by the state."
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old August 3, 2013, 12:56 PM   #28
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 3,062
Quote:
csmsss
Quote:
Quote:
It's a "vacuum formed" kydex case for a rifle. He's asking $500 for one.
I must be missing something. Kydex is a rigid material. How does one of these cases make it easier to remove the firearm than, say, a soft case, which takes about a half second to open?
Embody is fishing for lawsuits to file.
He didn't build that case to carry the gun, he built it that way to attract attention from the public and law enforcement.

He built that homemade kydex case so that it would look exactly like an AR from a distance. While it meets the Tennessee requirement that the firearm must be in a locked case, it was his intention to attract as much attention as possible.

IMHO he's a nut and does gun owners and the Second Amendment no favors.
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)

Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
dogtown tom is offline  
Old August 3, 2013, 02:06 PM   #29
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankEttin
Apparently you took this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
...It is an affirmative defense if the owner can prove the items are legally registered, but that's a defense made in court,...
entirely out of context.
I did at that. Because that was the only thing that interested me. There wasn't much to say about some idiot doing dumb things as the general opinion of the board has borne out, but the opinion on the law itself was what I was interested in.
JimDandy is offline  
Old August 12, 2013, 06:30 PM   #30
jaysouth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2001
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 787
This is the person that went into the Costco on Charlotte Pike openly carrying a .44 magnum handgun. He was confronted and escorted out of the building.

Prior to that, Costco had a 'no firearms' policy enforced by a small sign on the front. After emboy showed his rear end, the sign is very large and management is not willing to look the other way if someone's CC gets printed under a jacket.

This fool is dangerous and should not be allowed to own a firearm or computer. He has been kicked off all the local gun boards after making threats and anti-Semitic slurs.

The Tennessean will not even publish his letters any longer and he has been kicked off their opinion commentary forums. That's about as low as one can get.

Last edited by Tom Servo; August 12, 2013 at 06:41 PM. Reason: Removed intemperate language
jaysouth is offline  
Old August 13, 2013, 05:45 PM   #31
johnwilliamson062
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
I thought a person was required to keep the NFA paperwork on their persons when with the item in public. It isn't clear to me whether he provided the paper work and it's validity is in question or he did not have the paperwork. If it is the latter I can't feel bad for him. If they denied the validity then he should bring suit. Even if the case is thrown out by a judge who reviews the paperwork, he will be out some time and probably attorney costs.

Searching a locked case b/c of the shape? Really. You guys think that should be legal? What if it were just a normal plano rifle case?

Pro-gun groups won't really win until gun owners accept the place of political protest and civil disobedience in the US legal system.

Last edited by johnwilliamson062; August 13, 2013 at 05:52 PM.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old August 13, 2013, 10:27 PM   #32
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062
...It isn't clear to me whether he provided the paper work and it's validity is in question or he did not have the paperwork. If it is the latter I can't feel bad for him....
According to the article he refused to supply the paperwork.

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062
...Pro-gun groups won't really win until gun owners accept the place of political protest and civil disobedience in the US legal system.
Maybe or maybe not, but if we are going use political protest and/or civil disobedience, we need to understand those mechanism and act in ways well calculated to actually produce positive results. Poorly conceived and/or executed acts of protest or civil disobedience won't get us anywhere and will actually jeopardize our interests.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old August 14, 2013, 06:35 AM   #33
thallub
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
Quote:
This fool is dangerous
Methinks you are spot on. Embody hates the police. IMO: There is a good chance he will have a violent confrontation with the police. Would like to see a workup on this guy by profilers/shrinks.

Embody could care less about your gun rights; it's all about Embody. He has repeatedly said as much on several gun boards.
thallub is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 11:34 AM   #34
dvc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 1999
Posts: 387
This is getting interesting, folks.

http://www.newschannel5.com/story/23...-to-grand-jury

More info here:

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/2...cate-goes.html
dvc is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 11:55 AM   #35
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
Quote:
Embody acted as his own lawyer during the preliminary hearing, which lasted more than an hour.
Well, there's his first problem.

However, the judge was mistaken in not allowing Embody to produce proof that the silencer was legally owned. They appear to be doing things a little...differently in Tennessee.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 12:07 PM   #36
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
He's foolish, and he's dangerous. I think there's a pretty good chance that he'll wind up in a shootout with the police.

With that said, I'm not sure that the judge was mistaken in denying him the opportunity to present his proof of registration of the silencer. This is merely my shooting-from-the-hip reaction, but I seem to recall that ownership of an unregistered silencer is an offense and that registration is an affirmative defense. If this latest hearing was merely to determine if there was enough evidence to send it to a grand jury, then it's not really the time or place to allow Embody to present his whole case, . . . particularly if he's trying to present evidence that was not presented to the officers on scene.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 12:43 PM   #37
dvc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 1999
Posts: 387
If I understand correctly, this hearing was to determine whether there was sufficient evidence to send the case to the grand jury. I am hearing that evidence can not be introduced in the preliminary hearing until after the case proceeds to the grand jury.
dvc is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 01:14 PM   #38
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
I don't do federal criminal work, and in Arkansas, we use a "felony information" rather than grand jury indictments, so grand juries are a little unfamiliar to me. With that said, they're not full-blown trials (as I understand it). It's just a question of "is there enough information to move forward with charging the defendan with crimes X, Y and Z?"
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 01:32 PM   #39
dvc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 1999
Posts: 387
If anyone is interested, Leonard has posted audio from this hearing on his YouTube channel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ft5bOGyjmaE

I didn't know it was legal to record court hearings.....hmm.
dvc is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 01:52 PM   #40
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
It looks like the hearing was on Embody's motion to suppress the evidence as illegally seized. In that case Embody's offer of evidence that he legally possessed the suppressor would have been out of order.

The issue for the court was solely whether the police officers, based on what they saw and other information they actually had at the time, were justifed in their actions. Since Embody refused to provide at the time evidence that he legally possessed the suppressor, it was not information the police officers had at the time and therefore would have no bearing on the issue brought to the court on the motion to suppress.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper

Last edited by Frank Ettin; August 21, 2013 at 11:08 PM. Reason: correct typo
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 02:51 PM   #41
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
Here's the takeaway...

"I understand you have a right to exercise your constitutional rights, but frankly, the way you went about exercising your constitutional rights was completely stupid."


Regarding his presenting proof of ownership...

As it was once explained to me, when you are dealing with NFA items, you must maintain copies of the ownership records anytime you take the device outside of your home, and must present them on demand of law enforcement.

I'm not sure if that's true or not, but if it is, then Embody likely did commit an NFA violation and it should go to trial.

The Grand Jury really isn't a time to be providing documentation proving/disproving something.

He had his chance and he blew it.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 02:53 PM   #42
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
It looks as if Tennessee does allow the recording of court proceedings.

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/tennessee-recording-law
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 03:55 PM   #43
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Posts: 3,084
So is he trying for a 1st amendment statement as well?
dakota.potts is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 05:26 PM   #44
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
Quote:
As it was once explained to me, when you are dealing with NFA items, you must maintain copies of the ownership records anytime you take the device outside of your home, and must present them on demand of law enforcement.
It's a state-by-state thing. Under federal law, the owner has to provide registration to an agent of the BATFE if asked.

However, several states (including Tennessee) word the law in a way that implies that one must show the paperwork to law enforcement.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 05:39 PM   #45
NRAInstructor
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 17, 2013
Posts: 11
I'm all for activists pushing for rights. But don't you think it would be smart to like have some lawyers and media with you when you pull stunts to embarass the cops, fish for lawsuits, etc.? And it would seem to be kinda important to know the law and have citations with you. There is a time and place, and that would usually be organized, well publicized group efforts.

Yeah, and that worked out real good in Cali, now nobody can carry.
NRAInstructor is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.07613 seconds with 10 queries