Veteran arrested in front of his son & fellow boy scouts for "rude weapon display". - Page 2
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 48

Thread: Veteran arrested in front of his son & fellow boy scouts for "rude weapon display".

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Outlaw View Post
    The video has even more stunning dialogue, but Grisham says he is the most upset about how his son was treated, and how the incident will shape his view of the police.
    There are those on each side of the fence, but I am glad his son now sees the police in this view, that's the view they should be seen in. In my opinion, that is the safest view for a civilian to see police, if just for their own protection.
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  2.   
  3. #12
    I doubt very much you will see any big civil lawsuit award as a result of this incident. In fact, I doubt you'll see a lawsuit at all. It's unfortunate that the police handled this just the way they did (I don't agree with how they handled it), but they were not wrong to investigate, not wrong to make a stop, and fully within their lawful powers to disarm him during the stop (I don't agree with how they did that either, given he was compliant). Carrying a loaded rifle across the chest in a single-point combat sling, or across the chest in the manner that the good MSgt did, essentially keeps the rifle "at the ready" continuously, and, while completely outside of a hunting context, will very likely be considered similar to brandishing or inappropriate display of a weapon in most places in the country. It is very much like walking around with your pistol in your hand. The officers have no idea who this guy is, and yeah, that manner of rifle carry might in fact be a violation of Texas law (outside of pursuit of game while hunting). I don't know, maybe a Texas hunter could bring some light as to how rifles/shotguns may be carried around. I do know Texas is not an open carry state, and therefore you cannot walk around with a loaded weapon any way or anywhere you want.

  4. #13
    The MSG was Illegal in one respect, and not too smart in another respect.
    For one thing, the first thing he is required to do, (in Texas, at the first official contact with a law enforcement officer) is to advise him that he has a CHL. He was illegal in that respect.
    The second thing he should have done was to not be a smart-butt to the officer, but should have advised the officer what was going on, to get ahead of things in the officer's mind... Officer, we're on a ten-mile hike for my Son's Scout merit badge, and I've got my rifle in case we encounter a mean wild boar. He, being a MSG in the USArmy, should have had better sense than to act like such a dip (confrontational to the dip officer) in front of his son, because he should have known that it would more than likely escalate things to a bad situation (which actually happened).
    This MSG had long demonstrated his valor to his son, by his accomplishments and Military awards. He could have taken this opportunity to teach him even more. He should have exercised the utmost respect in a bad situation, if for nothing but to teach that sort of respect to his son. If he had, the situation probably would not have turned out so bad. He could have probably finished the march with his son, and He could then have taken action later, to advise the chief of police, the newspaper and the city council, about one of their butthead cops. (Whether or not it might do any good.)

    The officer's approach, and his grabbing the weapon was wrong, and could have gotten himself killed. But the MSG was wrong for acting like he did in the first place. The rest of the officers were wrong, also, for not pointing out their fellow officer's errors. But the thin blue line is very thin. That's just a fact, and the MSG should have known that, too.

    This post may get me castigated on this thread, but Truth is Truth. Common sense mixed with honey will always turn out to be sweeter than sulpher and gunpowder. Also, righting a wrong isn't always best accomplished by bluster and offense.

    Not looking for an argument here... just stating my opinion.
    Stop, Drop, and Roll won't work in Hell.
    The truth about the former Republic of the United States of America:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6Ioz...ayer_embedded#

  5. #14
    If only there was footage for the first half of the encounter. I don't think it would have been unreasonable to identify the guy and make sure he's good to go.
    Could have been handled much differently from both sides.
    It's better to die upon your feet than to live upon your knees!-Emiliano Zapata

  6. Quote Originally Posted by Gallstones View Post
    Interesting premise.
    I wonder what would be the outcome if a person did stand their ground and fired on, perhaps killed LE in a situation where the person was being threatened by LE?

    If the law is blind and LE act like thugs, then they are thugs and a person should be able to protect themself from them, even if that means resorting to lethal force.

    I have a feeling it wouldn't play out that way though.
    Refer to this supreme court decision: John Bad Elk vs. United States, 1900

  7. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by shooter2384 View Post
    Refer to this supreme court decision: John Bad Elk vs. United States, 1900
    .
    Directly from the court decision you cite: "but where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction when the officer had the right to make the arrest from what it does if the officer had no such right."
    .
    As I asserted before, the officers had the lawful right to investigate, make the stop, disarm him for the duration of the stop, and, if it is probable that a law has been violated (which I suspect is the case, though I'm not sure), effect an arrest. Had the MSgt opened fire on them he would be a criminal. Had he killed one of them he would be a murderer.
    .
    Again, I don't agree with how the officers handled this particular incident, but I don't perceive anything illegal about their conduct. You don't like the law? Get it changed.
    Last edited by JCliff; 04-17-2013 at 12:57 PM. Reason: additional comment/grammar

  8. #17
    Not quite sure what the law is in Texas regarding open carrying rifles, but this guy was an ass. His poor attitude and mouth that wont shut for more than 1 second sure doesnt set a good example for his children, nor does it help his situation. If this guy really thought his rights were being violated, he should have shut up and taken it to court.

    The article says "He would only be in trouble if he had been carrying the rifle in a way calculated to cause alarm”. Obviously this guy caused alarm because somebody called the police on him for walking down a street with an AR-15 on strapped on his chest. And based on his history of controversial blogging, I think this guy was most likely out looking for trouble. He has a camera readily available and a person to conveniently video tape it.

  9. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    An Alternate Reality, I Assure You...
    Posts
    5,115
    Both parties could have acted different, that's for sure. I understand that the AR is just about the best PDW for use against wild animals like foxes and such but, the manner in which he was carrying it could have been the alarming part about it all. I wonder if he would have attracted attention had the weapon been slung over his shoulder, barrel down? I'd like to see the first few minutes of the event too, I think that would provide critical info. If the LE recieved a call that a man with a rifle is walking in what appears to be threatening manner(to the person who called), they have to respond.

    Both groups should have handled themselves better, I guess... I can see both sides of it. But, I don't have all the facts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    [*]Don't be afraid to use sarcasm, mockery and humiliation. They don't respect you. There's no need to pretend you respect them.
    Operation Veterans Relief: http://www.opvr.org/home.html

  10. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    When I carry a firearm when hiking, I make sure I can get to it as fast as possible, because if we think the 21 foot rule is fast for humans, just wait till a cougar halves that time.
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  11. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,348
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Deserteagle View Post

    The article says "He would only be in trouble if he had been carrying the rifle in a way calculated to cause alarm”. Obviously this guy caused alarm because somebody called the police on him for walking down a street with an AR-15 on strapped on his chest. And based on his history of controversial blogging, I think this guy was most likely out looking for trouble. He has a camera readily available and a person to conveniently video tape it.
    Obviously my openly carried handgun caused alarm to a few liberals last summer as well. Was I arrested for doing what I have the right to do? NO. Did any officer ever think it was a good idea to grab at my sidearm? HELL NO! I will shoot anyone for that. Those cops were stupid and acting outside official capacity. An officer's OPINION does not become law just because he deems his opinion more important than another's.

    Your fear of another person's fear is stupid. Your willingness to surrender your rights to a LEO just because he wants you to suggests that you are stupid on a whole new level. What you are doing right now is considered blogging. Your avatar is a gadsden flag, you,lobby online, in your blog, for the right to carry which is now a controversial topic in this nation. By the standards you set for others, you condemned yourself. Maybe you should leave your firearm at home because you are a controversial blogger. Just as another's opinion does not negate your right to protect yourself, at same opinion does not negate the RESPONSIBILITY of Msgt. Grisham to protect that scout troop, and at the same time be secure in his own person.

    The camera was there to document the hike, as required, so his son could become an eagle scout, as the article and Msgt. Grisham both state.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast