Tennessee Firearms Assoc. Inc.

Well, yesterday I made a impulse purchase.






I had looked at Yankee Hill supressors on the web and was interested in their product. It seemed fairly inexpensive and it has a flash hider and quick detach system all built in. I did not know that the store where I went to ship a firearm was a class III dealer and that they had these.

As the receipt shows I contracted for the purchase of a supressor, the adapter, and for them to help with the paperwork. I filled out the paperwork. They said they would call for me to come in when someone was in the shop to do the fingerprints. Then they would submit the paperwork for me.

I received a call from the owner of the shop who told me on the phone that he could not sell me the supressor. I asked why. He said I broke the law by carrying in a state park. I told him I did not and told him about public chapetr 428. He said I broke the law because the muzzle tip was painted. I said that it was not against the law. He then told me he just didn't want to sell the item to me because the sheriff wouldn't approve me. I asked on what basis. He said he would not sell me the item and to come get my money. I told him I had a contract with him for the purchase of the silencer and services. He said to come get my money.

I called the Williamson County Sheriff Department and they said approvals are not political, that the sheriff will approve if the other agencies don't disapprove. They said there would have to be substantial proof that I did something illegal before they would disapprove the form.

I didn't tell him of the Radnor Lake incident. Gun dealers do not sell items to crazy people. I think his decision to make an issue of this is based upon libelous remarks from a local forum administrator who has called me a criminal and where many forum posters ahve called me crazy, mentally unstable, and other unkind things. Now that I have been damaged I wonder if I have cause for a suit?

Talk to an attorney and see.

Leonard,

First, I appreciate your private reply to my question, but I asked the question publicly, and a public answer was desired.

Second, if I were you, I would think very carefully before I presume to tell an administrator of this board what's allowed or not in a topic. You'll very quickly find yourself unable to post on it.

David

It seems pretty obvious who the idiot is on this thread, and it is not David. As you have been told on other forums, you actions, even if we ignore the fact that they hurt our cause, are wreckless at best and possibly lethal to yourself and others at worst.

It would seem that after you lost your posting previledges on the other forums you would have learned something. But you didn't, and you just can't handle the fact that you are being told how wreckless and stupid your actions are. Even the guys on the Draco thread on the other forum tried to tell you to carry a "recognized" handgun in order to avoid trouble, and they are big fans of the Draco.

Perhaps you should start your own forum... You could call it "What I Tried to Get Away With".com. Yeah, try that and let us know how it works out, will you?

I'll be watching to see if you win that Darwin Award that you seem so desperate to win...

One of my favorite movie quotes: "Life is tough... It's even tougher when you're stupid." You must lead a really tough life there, kwikrnu...

Menzoberranzan,

If you think I fit in with Brady and HCI, then you are sadly mistaken. Hear me out, please... My beef is with the fact that he was being wreckless and was obviouly seeking a confrontation. The fact that he had the muzzle painted orange in order to simulate an airsoft gun, and the fact that he was on other forums asking what was the best armor piercing round doesn't fit into the "carry personal defence" picture as it does the "make the cops think it is an airsoft gun, then punch through their body armor with the AP rounds" mentality. My whole point in protesting his actions is in trying to protect the progress we made in carry legislation last session. Just because something is legal doesn't mean you need to be putting it in everyone's face. People resent that, and it tends to make them angry and even more determined to stop you. (Remember when, shortly after the election, Obama said "We won", and how arrogant people thought he was?) We have to use a little common sense... We need to be able to exercise our rights, absolutely. We are having to work our way back to where we used to be when the founding fathers put the 2nd Amendment to paper... We lost many of our rights because of what some refer to as the "frog in the kettle syndrome" - they were lost a little at a time until, one day, we said "This isn't right and we have to fix it." We are going to have to win those rights back in much the same way (save a violent overthrow of the government which I think we would all prefer to avoid.) A bit at a time, until we are back where we need to be. If someone suddenly creates a big controversy, the media will naturally come down against us, and it sets back our schedule of regaining all the rights our forefathers intended be protected.

Nothing would make me happier than for all of us to be able to carry whatever weapon we want, wherever we want. But we don't get there by putting orange muzzled Draco pistols out there slung over our BDU jackets in the parks. We have to show the sheeple that we are like them, only we believe in personal responsibility and the Constitution. We can't do that if we are running around like a bunch of commandos.

I'm sorry if you feel I'm anti-freedom because of my response to kwikrnu, but I'm pro-freedom for all and I don't like it when one person's actions jeapordize the freedoms of the rest of us. When he first posted several weeks ago about the fact that he was going to open carry an AK-47 pistol, I didn't say a word, though I felt like the open carry may not have been in his (or our) best interest. Then, I'm sitting at home when I hear Channel 4's story about a man carrying an AK-47 in Radnor Lake State Park. I knew immediately who it was, and then I had to listen to their misinformation about how it was an AK-47 with a cut-down barrel and no stock. The general public never knew that the weapon was indeed manufactured as a pistol from the start. So, now the general (misinformed) public thinks a handgun carry permit holder was carrying "one of those evil assault rifles" that had been modified, and was carrying it in a park. I could not have cared less if he had been carrying it under his BDU jacket (I have no problem with BDU's and have worn them officially and unofficialy for years) and had gone unnoticed. And for the most part, if he had been carrying any (what would be considered a more traditional) pistol or revolver openly, just taking an actual walk in the park and had been accosted by the authorities, I would have been raising 5 kinds of H3LL in his favor... But he sought out confrontation... He was pushing to see what he could get away with, and then has gone public with it in order to stir up controversy. We are never going to win in the media if the situation is anything less than 100% black and white obvious. This was, for the uninformed, a "gray area" so the media spun it to hurt us. We don't need that kind of publicity. I believe that (barring certain types of convictions) a person should be able to own and carry (if practical) any firearm they want... Want to strap on a GE minigun ala Ventura in Predator? Go for it if you are financially and physically able... I don't care... Want to put a surplus 75MM piece in your front yard without having to de-mil it? Go for it, I don't care. But we will never get the laws there to do that with incidents like this. In fact, I'm probably more pro-gun, pro-freedom, "let the people carry what they want, wherever they want" than a lot of other instructors out there... It's just that I recognize the fact that we need to demonstrate some self control to get there to do it.

This paragraph is not aimed at you, but is an explanation of my entire set of actions before I said a word to him: I didn't make my statements to kwikrnu without having first searched the web for anything else he posted. I put some of that information over in his other thread here: . I try to learn as much as I can about someone before I flame them... I try to see what it is I might not be understanding that has caused them to think/post what they have, so that I do not take them to task for something that doesn't warrant it. To do otherwise could be a waste of my time and might make an enemy out of someone who would have otherwise been a good friend to have. When I saw what he had posted elsewhere, I came to understand him pretty well... I felt it best to speak out at that point, because many folks will not say what they feel due to our generations having been raised under the mantra "if you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all." And I commend you for speaking out against my words used against kwikrnu... At least you spoke up... But please... Get to know me on the forum before you condemn me or my company... I've got students that decided not to go back to Blackwater (now Xe) because they like my methods and classroom substance (as well as pricing) better... You might find I'm a pretty decent guy that believes more strongly in the 2nd Amendment than you might imagine... That is the only reason I ever posted...

Mike

Mike,

Your response to kwikrnu was measured and appropriate. Having suffered kwikrnu's comments on other forums I was surprised he even tried to again be the center of attention here.

David, thank you for your patience and for banning that clown. We don't need to support every supposed pro-gun individual when their actions clearly misrepresent what the law abiding citizen believes.

Thanks Tim...

-Mike

Mike, David, Mr. Archie and the rest of you that had to read that garbage (including the other thread here and on other forums) I think you all treated his with kid gloves. We all know his type and the damage they do. You know in a way I would have liked the set back of a Krink being termed a rifle as to have to know in the future what his little I am smarter than you stunt will cost .

The type of decisions exhibited here and on other threads causes me to believe that in time the rope will tighten on its own.

Bravo to all of you. I've been following this thread with focussed interest. Thank you for not selling him the suppressor. Thank you for pointing out his sad behavior in a civil manner. Thank you for banning him. The only reason I wish he wasn't banned would be to give us all a chance to keep a closer eye on him. I've gotta say, we'll be seeing his name in the news again. I'll bet within the next 8 months. Maybe I'm overly paranoid, but I get the impression that he's planning something bad. My impression is that he plans on using all of his Forum posts to somehow set up his legal defense. He's pushing a position that no one in their right mind would push. Provocative at best.

Although this article from Knoxville seems anti-2A on a subtle level I think they nailed his character on the head:

http://www.knoxviews.com/node/12731

This part said it best:

"And we've now seen the appearance of an emergent species, the Wooded Douchebag (Camophilus armada). Dressed in camo and openly carrying an AK-47 pistol, he can be seen..."

Bear in mind I do not agree with the spirit of the article, just the characterization of Mr. Leonard (last name not posted).

Glad to be here,
StandingTall

I'm with you, StandingTall... I don't agree with the spirit of the article. But...

Camophilus armada... Says it in a classy way, but still gets the point across. I think I shall add that to my lexicon... Yes, I shall.

I just noticed over at TGO that he pulled this stunt back in October at Costco... Was reading this thread: and someone asked "is this the same guy that caused a problem at Costco?" They received an affirmative response, along with a hyperlink to the original thread

I think, if at all possible, we need to go out of our way to explain to people that this type of behavior is not something we support... Be it face to face with those that do not fully understand the circumstances, or be it a situation where we are being questioned by the media. We would and should be careful how we word what we say in order to make sure that we do not hurt our own cause, but instead distance ourselves from this type of behavior.

Mike

Leonard is obviously what I would call a "bad apple". In politics, the bad apple is usually thrown to the wolves so that they have no support from either side.

That said, IMO, this guy is a ticking time bomb looking for an excuse to hurt someone. Maybe particularly someone in the LE community. Even though this is all circumstantial, isn't it always the case? I wonder who should be keeping a close eye on this one? I just can't get it out of my head that he's going to do something terrible and I feel that we have a resposibility to act, by releasing a statement to the media, or LE in such a way that they understand we do not support the actions he has taken while maintaining that we support legal carry in parks.

It's a little out of my scope to practice politics, but it seems the right thing to do. I'll leave that up to those who make the decisions and those who can speak more professionally than I can.

StandingTall