PDA

View Full Version : Officer threatens arrest after my friend files complaint




Matt Collins
05-09-2011, 11:56 PM
This happened to a friend of mine in Nashville a couple of days ago!

The officer didn't know the law, my friend did and was correct while the officer was incorrect. This officer is in line to become the next police chief.

The incident got a writeup in the local paper:

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110509/GALLATIN01/110509045/GPD-officer-threatens-arrest-after-citizen-files-complaint-?odyssey=mod_sectionstories




HERE IS THE VIDEO OF THE INCIDENT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVry0ByRICI


Notice how the cop report comes back and says that he has a suspended gun permit. Well there is a story to that too. This man is a freedom fighter!!! Just Google for his name "Leonard Embody" to see the whole story.

aGameOfThrones
05-10-2011, 12:01 AM
Ignorance of the law is no excuse, officer.

BamaAla
05-10-2011, 12:17 AM
This is the mentality of most of the police officers I have ever known or come into contact with. Strope should be fired on the spot for the comment he made, but I'm sure that will never happen.

Matt Collins
05-10-2011, 12:19 AM
Google for Leonard Embody's name sometime and you'll see a lot more than this. He is someone who I consider a hero and an intellectual heavyweight in the liberty movement. He knows the law better than most of the people who write it, enforce it, or judge it.

Austrian Econ Disciple
05-10-2011, 12:25 AM
When Cop's get paid regardless of their actions, you think they are going to care about 'customer service'? No. You could obviously tell the Police Officer was a power tripping narcissist. How much you want to bet that would have never occured had the security personnel been voluntary funded.

Capitalism is Life lecture by Jeffrey Tucker clearly encapsulates the difference between the State and the Market.

Razmear
05-10-2011, 12:26 AM
I'm pretty sure your friend is incorrect in this case. The intersection is not a 4 way, but a T, so only the traffic approaching from the intersecting road needs to treat the non functioning light as a stop while the thru street would treat the light as a yellow or caution.

Indy Vidual
05-10-2011, 12:29 AM
Google for Leonard Embody's name sometime and you'll see a lot more than this. He is someone who I consider a hero and an intellectual heavyweight in the liberty movement. He knows the law better than most of the people who write it, enforce it, or judge it.

As you requested, here are some results from Google:

Leonard Embody—a.k.a. the Radnor Lake Rambo...

John Pierce from OpenCarry.org re: Your friend:


John Pierce is a co-founder of OpenCarry.org, a group that seeks to normalize openly carrying "properly holstered handguns."

"On a fundamental level, I don't think he did anything wrong," Pierce said of Embody, "but politically that might not be best thing to do, and it's not something we're advocating for."

Armed man startles Radnor Lake State Park hikers (http://www.akfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60947)



...Fifth, Leonard probably could have saved himself a world of figurative hurt if he had simply had a better grasp of how to make his point... ~Source (http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/12/legally_losing_friends.html)

Matt, I'm open minded, but even The Gun nuts seem to think your friend is (was) way out of line. :eek:

BamaAla
05-10-2011, 12:38 AM
Matt, I'm open minded, but even The Gun nuts seem to think your friend is (was) way out of line. :eek:

Gun nut here and I tend to agree with the others. The Kalashnikov short gun is silly.

Austrian Econ Disciple
05-10-2011, 12:39 AM
I like this fellow. Fuck the PC douches -- they sound like NRAWOL.

Indy Vidual
05-10-2011, 12:48 AM
Gun nut here and I tend to agree with the others. The Kalashnikov short gun is silly.


I like this fellow. Fuck the PC douches -- they sound like NRAWOL.

The sources I posted are strongly pro 2nd amendment, can you imagine what anti-gun people think of this guy?


...Fuck the PC douches...

Hey, that helps a bunch, "F^ck the PC douches":
Is that the way to actually win long-term, or to remain a Disciple of an obscure Austrian writer?

Austrian Econ Disciple
05-10-2011, 01:00 AM
The sources I posted are strongly pro 2nd amendment, can you imagine what anti-gun people think of this guy?



Hey, that helps a bunch, "F^ck the PC douches":
Is that the way to actually win long-term, or to remain a Disciple of an obscure Austrian writer?

I support all open-carry efforts. I support those who go out and open carry a .50 Barret. I support and do not derisively deride or chastise my fellow open-carry supporters. If that is your definition of 'victory', it is a shallow one indeed. I am not saying it is the most effective, but to hear your supposed allies go out of their way to attack the guy, it reminds me of the sham that is the NRA.

PS: I personally do not care what anti-gun people think of the guy. Nor, do I care what they think about my natural right to own a gun and carry it. Furthermore, I doubt these guys are as supportive of that right as they put on. I do not know of many movements to nullify the 34, 68, and 86 gun laws and I am going to be pushing for that more and more in the coming years in any and all avenues (if that means lawsuits go for it...which these people seem to attack Lambody for).

Texan4Life
05-10-2011, 01:02 AM
LMAO.. isn't the cop car half way in the outer lane "impeding traffic"?

Indy Vidual
05-10-2011, 01:13 AM
...Nor, do I care what they think about my natural right to own a gun and carry it....

Perfectly fine, so far.
If you care about spreading your ideas to others, then "F^ck the PC douches" might not be the best approach, IMO.

Also, this doesn't imply you 'have to be' PC yourself. There are many non-PC phrases which are better than "F^ck the PC douches".

cornbread
05-10-2011, 01:25 AM
they think,because they have a badge,that means they make up the laws as they go,an most of the time they have the judge in there back pocket,i no,because of the shit i am going through,i think im going to have to go public with my case to make them understand,that i do have rights,and im not going to be walked over,just got to find the right people to put it out there.someone with some back bone thats going to look at the case from top to bottom

BamaAla
05-10-2011, 01:25 AM
Perfectly fine, so far.
If you care about spreading your ideas to others, then "F^ck the PC douches" might not be the best approach, IMO.

Also, this doesn't imply you 'have to be' PC yourself. There are many non-PC phrases which are better than "F^ck the PC douches".

Think you might have messed up on the quote function.

Indy Vidual
05-10-2011, 01:29 AM
Think you might have messed up on the quote function.

You are correct I fixed it, sorry. :o

liberalrepublican
05-10-2011, 01:36 AM
LMAO.. isn't the cop car half way in the outer lane "impeding traffic"?

Cops are above the law because they say so. You must obey. You must cooperate.

YumYum
05-10-2011, 02:54 AM
What is the issue here? I couldn't understand what the policeman was saying.

123tim
05-10-2011, 05:01 AM
What is the issue here? I couldn't understand what the policeman was saying.

I believe that the policeman was telling the driver that he was breaking the law by stopping at a non-functioning light. He was telling the driver that he should have driven straight through. I think that the officer actually gave the ticket because the driver was questioning the logic of the situation.


-----------------------


Who in their right mind would drive through a traffic light (that wasn't functioning) without first checking to make certain that the way was clear?

I can't believe that any officer would promote this rationale.

Krugerrand
05-10-2011, 05:13 AM
I'm pretty sure your friend is incorrect in this case. The intersection is not a 4 way, but a T, so only the traffic approaching from the intersecting road needs to treat the non functioning light as a stop while the thru street would treat the light as a yellow or caution.


Tennessee law states, “… any vehicle approaching an intersection that is controlled by a traffic-control signal that is inoperative because of mechanical failure or accident shall come to a full and complete stop …”

Laws like these probably vary quite a bit by state.


In regard to statements made by Hill and Strope that Embody had talked himself into a citation, Bandy said the officers’ conduct was “unprofessional.”

“Citations are meant to deter unlawful behavior,” he said. “We shouldn’t do it because we get upset with someone’s difference of opinion.

This was not a difference of opinion ... It was unlawful detention, false accusations, and attempted intimidation. Sorry, officer, but ignorance of the law is no excuse .. and not an opinion.

Krugerrand
05-10-2011, 05:14 AM
I believe that the policeman was telling the driver that he was breaking the law by stopping at a non-functioning light. He was telling the driver that he should have driven straight through. I think that the officer actually gave the ticket because the driver was questioning the logic of the situation.


-----------------------


Who in their right mind would drive through a traffic light (that wasn't functioning) without first checking to make certain that the way was clear?

I can't believe that any officer would promote this rationale.

The sad flip side is that I'm sure we could easily find a case where a driver did not know to stop at a non-functioning light and was sited for such failure and told ignorance of the law is no excuse.

123tim
05-10-2011, 05:29 AM
I didn't read the newspaper article attached with this video until later.

Everyone should read the article.

Pericles
05-10-2011, 09:11 AM
Excuse me officer, but could you speak more clearly int my Internet enabled device?

mconder
05-10-2011, 09:22 AM
Personally, I don't care what the law is. If I'm on a major highway and I see a traffic light not working, I am going to slow down and check things out before a blow through the intersection for my own safety.

fisharmor
05-10-2011, 10:20 AM
Perfectly fine, so far.
If you care about spreading your ideas to others, then "F^ck the PC douches" might not be the best approach, IMO.

Also, this doesn't imply you 'have to be' PC yourself. There are many non-PC phrases which are better than "F^ck the PC douches".

I think Embody was making an important point with the SBR incident.
It is this: Carrying a pistol won't get you noticed as long as you look like a cop.
He intentionally dressed in a way that could not possibly have been interpreted as him being a cop,
he intentionally carried a gun that could not possibly have been interpreted as a cop gun.

If you're an OC advocate and you draw the line at looking and dressing exactly like one of the privileged enforcement caste, you're not exactly pushing boundaries there.

OC advocates have the opportunity every time something like this happens to try to enlighten the public as to the rights of the situation. They always fail. They generally end up being just another statist boot licker.

Any right which is contingent on you dressing a certain way or refraining from exercising it in a certain way is called a privilege.

By the way, I've run into people like that in parks before and it didn't bother me one bit, because I was armed as well. There's another education OC advocates refuse to give: you can either pee your pants, or you can say 'Hi' and walk on, knowing that you're carrying a pistol for the very reason of dealing with kooks if you have to.

nocompromises
05-10-2011, 11:41 AM
A cop who does not know the traffic laws of the state he works in should be fired, period.

Why should anyone be allowed to give tickets if they don't know their own states traffic laws?

pcosmar
05-10-2011, 12:07 PM
He knows the law better than most of the people who write it, enforce it, or judge it.

That statement could apply to someone like me as well,,,for all the good it does anyone.

Until power is returned to people,,people will have no say.
The system protects the system.

Indy Vidual
05-10-2011, 06:36 PM
I think Embody was making an important point with the SBR incident.
It is this: Carrying a pistol won't get you noticed as long as you look like a cop.
He intentionally dressed in a way that could not possibly have been interpreted as him being a cop,
he intentionally carried a gun that could not possibly have been interpreted as a cop gun.

If you're an OC advocate and you draw the line at looking and dressing exactly like one of the privileged enforcement caste, you're not exactly pushing boundaries there.

OC advocates have the opportunity every time something like this happens to try to enlighten the public as to the rights of the situation. They always fail. They generally end up being just another statist boot licker.

Any right which is contingent on you dressing a certain way or refraining from exercising it in a certain way is called a privilege.

By the way, I've run into people like that in parks before and it didn't bother me one bit, because I was armed as well. There's another education OC advocates refuse to give: you can either pee your pants, or you can say 'Hi' and walk on, knowing that you're carrying a pistol for the very reason of dealing with kooks if you have to.

OK, that's good to know, thanks.
I support the "right to bear arms", but don't have much direct experience with Open Carry 'kooks'. :p

pcosmar
05-10-2011, 07:16 PM
I think Embody was making an important point with the SBR incident.
It is this: Carrying a pistol won't get you noticed as long as you look like a cop.
He intentionally dressed in a way that could not possibly have been interpreted as him being a cop,
he intentionally carried a gun that could not possibly have been interpreted as a cop gun.

If you're an OC advocate and you draw the line at looking and dressing exactly like one of the privileged enforcement caste, you're not exactly pushing boundaries there.

OC advocates have the opportunity every time something like this happens to try to enlighten the public as to the rights of the situation. They always fail. They generally end up being just another statist boot licker.

Any right which is contingent on you dressing a certain way or refraining from exercising it in a certain way is called a privilege.

By the way, I've run into people like that in parks before and it didn't bother me one bit, because I was armed as well. There's another education OC advocates refuse to give: you can either pee your pants, or you can say 'Hi' and walk on, knowing that you're carrying a pistol for the very reason of dealing with kooks if you have to.

There is so much truth here.
Years ago, and before a lot of changes, I Open Carried.
That was before any Open Carry Movement as far as I know. It was legal and known (to most) to be legal.
Few folks did. I was one.
I had a few contacts with LE and they were unintrusive and uneventful And each time I was on my way in moments.

I was asked by a few if I was a cop when they saw my gun. I had long hair, a beard and a skull and crossbones on my jacket.
I don't know what they were thinking
I never shot anyone and only had two times that I knowingly prevented violence. Both times with a violent individual, and both times I had to only remove the safety strap. I never even drew the gun.

It is a visible deterrent.

pcosmar
05-10-2011, 07:21 PM
but don't have much direct experience with Open Carry 'kooks'. :p

I like to think of myself as a Constitutional Carry Kook.
Thank you very much.

I prefer open (seems more honest)
Some prefer Concealed (discretion)

Either way it should be an unquestioned RIGHT.

georgiaboy
05-10-2011, 07:24 PM
There is so much truth here.
Years ago, and before a lot of changes, I Open Carried.
That was before any Open Carry Movement as far as I know. It was legal and known (to most) to be legal.
Few folks did. I was one.
I had a few contacts with LE and they were unintrusive and uneventful And each time I was on my way in moments.

I was asked by a few if I was a cop when they saw my gun. I had long hair, a beard and a skull and crossbones on my jacket.
I don't know what they were thinking
I never shot anyone and only had two times that I knowingly prevented violence. Both times with a violent individual, and both times I had to only remove the safety strap. I never even drew the gun.

It is a visible deterrent.

Do you think terrorists would be more or less prone to try and hijack an airplane full of open carrying citizens? I agree.

Our nation's laws and supporting logic are perfectly backwards.

BlackTerrel
05-10-2011, 09:25 PM
LMAO.. isn't the cop car half way in the outer lane "impeding traffic"?

That is EXACTLY what I noticed on watching the video. Matt's friend pulled all the way over yet the cop had to be in the middle of the lane. It's like they enjoy fucking with everyone's traffic.

You can take out "it's like" in the sentence above.

cubical
05-10-2011, 09:42 PM
The cop should have realized he was wrong when the guy in the car asked him who has the right of way if two highways intersect one another and the light is out. Clearly its a 4 way stop.

Matt Collins
05-11-2011, 03:53 PM
When Cop's get paid regardless of their actions, you think they are going to care about 'customer service'? No. You could obviously tell the Police Officer was a power tripping narcissist. They are trained to be that way, absolute authority, and no questions asked, obey my commands.


Capitalism is Life lecture by Jeffrey Tucker clearly encapsulates the difference between the State and the Market.Thanks, I'll add it to my NetFlix list.

angelatc
05-11-2011, 04:30 PM
I'm pretty sure your friend is incorrect in this case. The intersection is not a 4 way, but a T, so only the traffic approaching from the intersecting road needs to treat the non functioning light as a stop while the thru street would treat the light as a yellow or caution.

Depends on what state you're in. In Ohio, the person on the right has the right of way if there are no signs or functioning lights at a "T" intersection.

kwikrnu
05-11-2011, 07:52 PM
Depends on what state you're in. In Ohio, the person on the right has the right of way if there are no signs or functioning lights at a "T" intersection.

No offense, but that makes absolutely no sense.

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4511.132

kwikrnu
05-11-2011, 08:02 PM
I'm pretty sure your friend is incorrect in this case. The intersection is not a 4 way, but a T, so only the traffic approaching from the intersecting road needs to treat the non functioning light as a stop while the thru street would treat the light as a yellow or caution.

You're wrong. Tennessee law makes no distinction between 4 way or T intersections. ALL intersections controlled by a signal light are subject to Tenn. Code Ann. 55-8-110(c)"The driver of any vehicle approaching an intersection that is controlled by a traffic-control signal that is inoperative because of mechanical failure or accident shall come to a full and complete stop at the intersection, and may proceed with due caution when it is safe to do so"

Matt Collins
05-12-2011, 09:37 AM
I'm pretty sure your friend is incorrect in this case. The intersection is not a 4 way, but a T, so only the traffic approaching from the intersecting road needs to treat the non functioning light as a stop while the thru street would treat the light as a yellow or caution.
Not according to the TN driver's manual: http://www.tn.gov/safety/dlhandbook/DL_Manual2011.pdf

speciallyblend
05-12-2011, 10:24 AM
The real threat to freedom and liberty are police officers in this op!! They are far more dangerous then any foreign terrorist. In fact in my eyes they are the terrorists! This only applies to police officers if the shoe fits!!!

Koz
05-12-2011, 10:36 AM
This guy seems like a law abiding citizen to me. He obeys all of the laws, and still gets harrassed by the police, ridiculous.

Matt Collins
05-12-2011, 06:20 PM
Matt, I'm open minded, but even The Gun nuts seem to think your friend is (was) way out of line. :eek:
Of course they do. But these are the same people who think that our government should go stomping through the world enforcing it's version of "democracy". And a lot of them, if not outright most of them, also think that one should have to have a permit to carry.

Here's an exercise in futility for ya... please tell me one law that my friend Leonard has broken? They revoked his carry permit even though the court admitted that he broke no law "because he was a danger".

Matt Collins
05-13-2011, 08:45 PM
Gun nut here and I tend to agree with the others. The Kalashnikov short gun is silly.
But is "silly" against the law?

BamaAla
05-13-2011, 09:00 PM
But is "silly" against the law?

Absolutely not. I'm all for it on a philosophical level, but we don't live in that world at present. The idea is to put a friendly face on either concealed or open carry; things like your friend did does nothing for furthering gun rights and most likely hurts public perception for the rest of us. I firmly believe you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

kwikrnu
05-15-2011, 04:34 PM
http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r226/kwikrnu/gallatincityattorneyletter.jpg

Matt Collins
05-16-2011, 09:31 AM
Is that the way to actually win long-termThey ain't going to give us our freedoms, we have to take them.

speciallyblend
05-16-2011, 09:40 AM
http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r226/kwikrnu/gallatincityattorneyletter.jpg

so now they are trying to argue that the non functioning light is exempt from the law??? do they have law code? that exempts that light from the law??