Is this good or bad? I think Bad...

Not open for further replies.
The thing that gets me is this ISN'T a kid. It's a 37 year old man that should know better.

If he thinks he's helping RKBA, he's got a screw loose and probably shouldn't have guns.

If he knows this hurts RKBA, then that's another matter, and raises questions...
Why do this? Personal vendetta against gun owners?
Who finances his projects?
What will come next? (he has vowed to OC this weekend at another park)
Anyone interested in the story from the owner's point of view:
I went to the Tennessee State Radnor Lake State Park this afternoon to take in some nature and get some exercise. I dressed in boots, blue jeans, t-shirt, vest, and an old military issue gore-tex woodland camo jacket. I carried my new Romanian Draco AK pistol loaded with 31 123 grain FMJ ammunition from Walmart. I arrived at approximately 3:30 pm and with the pistol slung on my back I started my walk. It was mostly uneventful. I saw no deer and passed maybe 30 hikers. As I reached the end of the trail I made sure no one was close by and shifted the ak-47 pistol to the front of my body. I reached the end of the trail and turned onto the roadway where I saw the first ranger of the day. He asked me if it was an airsoft and I said no it was an AK-47 type pistol. He looked at me strangely and asked to see my permit. I showed my Tennessee handgun carry permit. He asked where I parked and I told him. He said I could keep walking I kept walking as he called someone. By the time I reached my car the ranger was no where in sight as I walk quickly. However, another ranger vehicle pulled in the parking lot and a ranger jumped out with a shotgun pointed at me and yelled at me to stay still and put the weapon on the ground. After I put the weapon down he told me to move away which I did. He then told me to put my face on the ground and my arms on my head. I complied. I think he had a gun trained on me the whole time, but I couldn’t see. He searched me quickly and put my AK into the truck. This particular ranger has seen me before and has asked to see my TN handgun carry permit. He asked to see the permit again and asked for my driver license. I told him I would not give him my license, but he could see the permit.

Three Nashville metro cop cars showed up pretty quickly. They talked among themselves for about an hour and then a cop pulled out a citation for arrest. It said I was being arrested for 39-17-1311 unlawful possession of a weapon. He asked me to sign and I told him I wanted to speak with his supervisor. He said okay, but that it would take a long time and he just wanted to cite and release me for my convenience (yeah right). I asked what part of 39-17-1311 I violated he said I couldn’t carry a rifle. I told him my firearm was classified as a pistol. It has no stock and never had a stock. I also pointed out that it has an 11.5” barrel with complies with the length of a handgun definition in Tennessee. He said it looks like I had cut the stock off and another said they had never heard of a 7.62x39 handgun. It took about another ½ hour for the sergeant to show up. In the meantime one of the original cops left, another park ranger came and left and two more cops showed up. The sergeant showed and I tried to explain that the firearm was a handgun. I also told him if they were going to arrest me to just take me in front of the magistrate right away. They spent another ½ hour asking me if I had a form 1, that the ATF classifies my pistol as a rifle, and they had never seen an AK pistol before. Finally they told me they had gotten in touch with the manufacturer and the manufacturer said it indeed was a pistol. I highly doubt that, but that is what they told me. They released the handcuffs, and gave me back my magazine, ammo, and pistol.

I think they handled it as well as could be expected. I felt the cop who was trying to charge me with a violation of 39-17-1311 had no basis for the charge.
Picture of the gun he was carrying, complete with his blaze orange tip so that (paraphrased) "the cops wouldn't shoot him because they'll think it is an airsoft"

I didn't mean to suggest that an AK wasn't capable of defense. It's usually not the best choice.

The issue is his motivation, not his choice of weapon.
An AK is an offensive weapon, and when pressed into a defensive roll is overkill and counterproductive to RKBA.

Doesnt offend me, shouldn't offend anyone. They make a great hunting rifle. The blaze ornage tip looks suspect of a bloomberg plant, trying to make a point on why colors on guns should be illegal. probably wasn't but I wouldn't put it past him.
I wouldn't tote around a gun in plan sight but thats my choice hes with in his rights and not bothering anyone. Tennessee has black bear, hogs, copper head, rattle snakes and coyotes and I would think an AK pistol would be better than a stick.
I'd say this guy is the 2nd Amendment parallel of Howard Stern, or one of the other "shock jocks" on radio talk shows. I can't say I necessarily agree with what he's doing and I still think he might be a VPC or Bloomberg plant, but he is exercising his rights.

I completely do not agree with the orange tip though, seriously dude, ***?
Open carrying anything is okay in my book. I like to carry my AR over my shoulder on my motorcycle to the range, and I'm glad I live in a state free enough to allow me such luxuries.
I'd say this guy is the 2nd Amendment parallel of Howard Stern

You mean the guy who exchanged his beliefs for $100 million dollars, left terrestrial radio, and now broadcasts the same tired schtick on satellite radio? Old Howard isn't battling the FCC any longer.

Leonard Embody crusades for the RKBA in the same way the KKK supports free speech for all.

  • This would be different if Leonard Embody hadn't:
  • Painted his muzzle like a toy
  • Asked about AP ammo for carry
  • Dressed in paramilitary gear
  • Cross-posted his plan on at least 6 websites
  • Misrepresented his plans, weapon, and motives whenever possible.
Last edited:
The guy is a tool.

A lot of states make it a crime to fail to provide identification to a law enforcement officer upon demand. No idea whether TN is one of those states, or whether the Park Ranger is considered a LE officer (but if he was carrying a gun, he probably is), so the tool is lucky they didn't arrest him for failing to provide identification.
He came out here and on other sites proclaiming the belief that OCing a Draco (AK-esque) pistol with an intentional airsoft paint job would keep anyone from shooting him and then insisting that he was going to go out with said "stealth" weapon and get some attention in spite of almost everyone telling him it was stupid idea.

He's as much an RKBA advocate as Larry Flynt was just a free speech crusader.
The Old Fuff does, and he isn't a troll. I would be a good idea to remember that the anti's (and more important, those that aren't committed to one side or the other) all have a right to vote, and in some if not most areas they outnumber us. If this kind of individual keeps kicking the wasp's nest we could all get stung by the general public's reaction. This dingbat was only trying to attract attention to himself, not promote RTKBA. Because of folks like him what is our legal right today may not be tomorrow. :fire:
The RKBA is not open to vote, it is guaranteed by The Constitution. Any attempt to take away the RKBA is Unconstitutional and therefore unlawful.

It's the one right that protects all the rest.
By the way, I lol'd at this in the opening post :D:D:

Last edited by hso; Today at 07:44 PM. Reason: inappropriate language :eek:
I think I met Richard Swing at a NASCAR function one time :cool:

If it's legal, it should be done.

If it pisses off the media, it should be done again.

Do you have a video clip of this:
Obviously I am pro gun and pro rights, but the news anchor went around and said I know it's legal, but this is wrong, he doesnt need this, lets stop this.
Last edited by a moderator:
model of 1905 said:
The RKBA is not open to vote, it is guaranteed by The Constitution. Any attempt to take away the RKBA is Unconstitutional and therefore unlawful. ...

And that's the crux of the matter. It isn't up to feelings, impressions, or what-have-you.

Or maybe it's exactly what despised minority groups MUST do if they ever want to be accepted as normal. You go out and live, you sit in the front of the bus, you make news until it isn't news any more.

Let's be very clear about what this individual did. This individual painted his AK-47 pistol to resemble an airsoft toy, dressed up in his camo, and went out with the express purpose of getting the attention of the news. You can start here at post #84:

This person made it very clear on multiple forums that he was not doing this to further the right to keep and bear arms, but was doing it to get attention and his 15 minutes of fame. Comparing that to the Civil Rights movement is just asinine.

Yes, let's be very clear.

He exercised his human rights. The fact that you dislike how or why he did it really doesn't matter.

The thing about rights in our society, the way they work, is that we agree to allow others to exercise them even when the exercise pisses us off. It's not that black people have a right to vote because they will vote for things we's that black people have a right to vote because we agree they should even if what they vote for pisses us off...and why? We tolerate them and they tolerate us and everyone is a little more free than if everyone attacked anyone who pissed them off.

I don't have to like what people do, I have to acknowledge that it's their right and leave them be...which I will do so long as they do the same for me. If we decide not to tolerate...if we start attacking anyone who exercises a "right" in a way we dislike, then the whole thing comes apart and all we are doing is negotiating for the exercise of privileges.

The problem with all of that is that it's hard and stressful. People don't like tolerating. They aren't good at it. That's where normalization comes in. Once people are used to a thing, once it is commonplace, it ceases to piss anyone off and everyone gets comfortable. At that point the fact that it is a right can sort of fade into the background and everyone can be happy.

So what is asinine in this conversation... attacking someone for pissing you off, or acknowledging that it is in fact something that must be tolerated and can lead to a good result?
I don't have to like what people do, I have to acknowledge that it's their right and leave them be...which I will do so long as they do the same for me.

Just because it is there right does not mean I will say what they are doing is appropriate.

Hypothetical example, some young kids decide to to make fun of a disabled elderly person and use rude language to insult them. Freedom of speech is a right, does not mean I will not tell some dipsheet to shut there pie hole and give some respect. Because it is there right, should we just as a society say they should be able to act in an inappropriate manner?

He was in his right to do what he did, but was it appropriate how he did it, and with the intent he did it. Not in my opinion. Guy is a jug head so badly seeking attention. A tool.... :rolleyes:
I agree with the following:

legal? Of course.

Tactful/appropriate? Nope.

Is there an AK pistol? Yes, it's a short barreled stockless AK...I recently say one at a gun and pawn. I'd buy it if it wasn't gold plated :(

Tact is critical...remember, we have our rights, however the more timid of our society will naturally freak out when a derivitive of a militarized rifle is being carried about in plain view. It's like that man that took his AR to an Obama rally. He was in his rights, but it wasn't all that tactful. I could perfectly understand what he was trying to convey, however there are many that would ignore his message because of how over the top the display was.

Sometimes I wonder if the AR guy could have made the point a bit more tastefully with a flintlock rifle?
Sometimes I run with scissors. Wise? no. Legal? yes. Do I want you or the government coming into my house and telling me to stop? Not so much.

Some of us seem pretty quick to abandon liberty in favor of placating the establishment.
This is enough to piss off the Pope, I tell ya what!
We are CONSTANTLY being evaluated for the way we carry. We carry knives and not swords for a similar reason; aside from neither the sword nor AK pistol being the best suited for daily use, they also convey a negative image to all that surround you. I do believe it is our right to do similar, but it's something that should not be done unless absolutely necessary. That being said: Someone seriously needs to take this boy behind the woodshed.
nor AK pistol being the best suited for daily use

why is a 1911 better suited for daily use? Who are you to say whats a daily use tool. Thats why I don't believe in big GOV'T to meny people saying whats acceptable. To me a AK is about as good a gun as any. Would I do it? No. Do I think if he wants to he shouldn't? No. Hes not breaking any laws than hes fine. I would be willing to bet there was a whole lot of awful crime that didn't get reported in Tenn. that was illegal.
Last edited:
Every non-LEO that carries a gun, concealed or open, is an ambassador for RKBA.

If you don't act accordingly, expect the wrath from everyone you represent.
Not open for further replies.