Decorated Vet Arrested

[rugerla1]

Don't think this has been posted, if it was please delete.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/16/decorated-vet-arrested-after-rudely-displaying-his-rifle-says-officer-pulled-gun-on-him-in-front-of-boy-scouts/

 

[Major Kong]

Unfortunately the cops are not your friends in today's America. Officer Friendly has retired...

[rugerla1]

What a position to be put in with your child there the whole time, watching this happen to his Dad. You can break into this country and be given more than the working man, but by God, don't you obey the law and walk down the street with a legal weapon! Get your a$$ back to work and support scumbags while they sit home and play Xbox!

[jtmaze]

I am not one for suing but the gun rights groups should be all over this and those officers should lose their jobs. Temple is not that big a place and this type treatment is unacceptable. I don't mean sue for money but at least make the police chief and officers if still employed make a formal apology to this man on the local news. <br /><br /><br />JTM<br />Sent from my hiding place in the woods

[rugerla1]

I am not one for suing but the gun rights groups should be all over this and those officers should lose their jobs. Temple is not that big a place and this type treatment is unacceptable. I don't mean sue for money but at least make the police chief and officers if still employed make a formal apology to this man on the local news. <br /><br /><br />JTM<br />Sent from my hiding place in the woods

I hear ya. I could see if someone called in "a man with a gun pulling a child through the woods by the arm and the child looked scared". But through out the video, it's apparent that he's not a threat. Now given, we didn't see it from the very beginning, but the officer admitted not using his loud speaker. I hope he is righted for this. And as far as the officer telling the child (without a parent there) that he's not allowed out of the car until he answers his questions????? I would be PISSED!!!!

[RichardR]

The only "right" we have left is ... the "right" to remain silent.

[GoneBallistic]

Sorry admins, I didn't see there was already a thread on this. Any LEO's want to share their perspective?

[MarkInNashville]

The first thing I thought of, while watching the video was that guy in Belle Meade, TN - carrying a gun, in his hand, when he said "I do not give my consent for you to search my wallet" about 3 times. Sorta makes me wonder if he wasn't trying to prove a point.

 

The "perp" (the veteran) said he had numerous tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and the cop asked what he would do there, the guy said, man this isn't Afghanistan. But think about this, that could have been as much or more "action" the cop had ever seen in Temple, Texas, or he may have just been shot at the day before. A solder is quite used to being around other armed folks, with slung riffles. It would make me uncomfortable to be around guys that I didn't know like this!

 

I do think that if the officer was afraid that something may have happened he should have drawn his weapon and ordered the person to disarm. A) we didn't see the entire thing, B ) we do not know what exactly had transpired. I don't think it was handled appropriately but I'm not sure what the best approach, in a situation like this, would be and truly hope to never be in a situation anything like this!

Edited April 17, 2013 by MarkInNashville

[QuietDan]

Here's my e-mail to the Mayor of Temple (bjones@templetx.gov) at: http://www.ci.temple.tx.us/index.aspx?NID=55

 

Recommend a suitable creation of your own be sent, if you so desire.

 

QuietDan

 

*******************************************************************************

 

Subject:  Out of control, ignorant-of-the law, arrogant, hopefully FORMER Temple Police Officer

 

Mayor Jones:

Fix this.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/345714/free-cj-grisham

My particular comment:

The Fort Hood garrison commander needs to place the entire Temple, Texas jurisdiction on the Off-Limits List for all Soldiers of the installation, with an exception for Soldiers who are Temple residents to travel directly to and from their homes. This Off-Limits note needs to last until this particular case and ones like it are resolved to the satisfaction of the Fort Hood garrison commander. After losing millions of dollars in commerce, the Temple leadership and businesses will beg the soldiers to return. This particular mechanism has been used with great success on any number of occasions.

A personal reply is expected.

Respectfully,

(signed)

 

********************************************************

 

IMO:  It's necessary for a citizen to conduct himself mostly correctly in his interactions with law enforcement; however, it is necessary for a law enforcement officer to conduct himself ABSOLUTELY CORRECTLY in his interactions with citizens. There are flaws in both of their performances; one is a citizen, who is in this type of situation once in a while, the other is an officer, who is in this type of situation on a more frequent basis.

 

The officer was more in the wrong for not being absolutely correct. It's a bad bust, IMO.

 

It went south when the officer grabbed for the rifle without verbal or physical warning and without having enough sense to realize the citizen's rifle was around his neck on a single point sling. The citizen pulled back, and the mess commenced.

 

The Sergeant didn't help matters. Adult leadership will now be required to sort this thing out. No city can long live with a reputation for out-of-control or poorly disciplined law enforcement officers. A few heads ought to be cracked together. Temple, its officers and its elected leadership will be laughingstocks until then.

 

IMO.

Edited April 17, 2013 by QuietDan

[Guest MilitiaMan]

Aah, reminds me of the time I was attacked, assaulted and tasered by local LE after I had called to report a drunk driver putting peoples lives in danger. Good times, good times.

 

I feel bad for the few good officers left, but I wouldn't trust a cop as far as I could throw him/her.

 

Like this video, it occured in front of my children. To this day they duck down in the car when they see police. It's really upsetting as a parent. We are taking the appropriate steps to help them get past this and thankfully they are really young.

 

This all goes to show what sort of country we live in today and we (average Joe's) must be the ones to defend the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and our dreedoms. What we have left of them anyway.

Edited April 17, 2013 by MilitiaMan

[Guest PapaB]

The only "right" we have left is ... the "right" to remain silent.

 

Good luck remaining silent while being questioned by LE. That'll go over real well.

[Guest MilitiaMan]

So you're suggesting what, just answer whatever they want because it's easier?

 

Rule # 1 when dealing with police: DON'T SAY ANYTHING.

 

It's your right to remain silent. And I for one will continue doing so. I will let my attorney speak for me.

 

 

Good luck remaining silent while being questioned by LE. That'll go over real well.

[Guest PapaB]

So you're suggesting what, just answer whatever they want because it's easier?

 

Rule # 1 when dealing with police: DON'T SAY ANYTHING.

 

It's your right to remain silent. And I for one will continue doing so. I will let my attorney speak for me.

 

The only thing I'm suggesting is that sometimes silence may be viewed as a hostile attitude by leo's and even that right may get violated. Example, you're stopped for a traffic violation. The officer runs your drivers license and learns you have a permit. He asks if you have a weapon and you say you have the right to remain silent. I don't think that will end very well.

 

You may only have been thinking of a contact where you may be suspected of something specific. I'm thinking of all contacts. When dealing with police, I prefer being pleasant and helpful if I can. If I'm a witness to something I'll not refuse to say anything, I'll provide whatever assistance I can.

[Guest MilitiaMan]

As in all areas of life, common sense should take a front seat.

 

Also, you are not required to "inform" LE that you have a firearm when pulled over in TN. Slightly off topic.

 

Now, that is totally different that answering his question when asked.

 

Bottom line - Everyone must choose for themselves how much they are willing to sacrifice their rights. Just as the rest of us must decide how far we are willing to go in order to protect and defend our rights and freedoms.

 

I know how I would respond to being asked if I am armed, especially when it has nothing to do with why I am being stopped. My way of handling things and protecting my rights may not be good for you. That's all well and good.

 

 

 

 

The only thing I'm suggesting is that sometimes silence may be viewed as a hostile attitude by leo's and even that right may get violated. Example, you're stopped for a traffic violation. The officer runs your drivers license and learns you have a permit. He asks if you have a weapon and you say you have the right to remain silent. I don't think that will end very well.

 

You may only have been thinking of a contact where you may be suspected of something specific. I'm thinking of all contacts. When dealing with police, I prefer being pleasant and helpful if I can. If I'm a witness to something I'll not refuse to say anything, I'll provide whatever assistance I can.

[battleop]

"He then asked me what I’m doing with the rifle, to which I responded in a calm manner, “Does it matter, officer? Am I breaking the law?” "

 

 

Was it really that hard to answer the officer's question without coming off as a prick?   What possible harm would come from telling the truth right off the bat instead of being confrontational?  

 

"Grisham said his boy was traumatized by the incident.

 

“Every time he sees a police officer he has a panic attack,” he said. “That’s unfortunate because we always taught our kids to respect police officers. My wife and I are angry about it.”

 

 

That's code for "I've won the lottery!  I'm suing for 10000000000000000 bucks".

Edited April 17, 2013 by battleop

[Guest MilitiaMan]

Would it be that hard for the cop to know the law, that he is sworn to uphold, and know that he (the vet) was not doing anything illegal?

 

 

"He then asked me what I’m doing with the rifle, to which I responded in a calm manner, “Does it matter, officer? Am I breaking the law?” "

 

 

Was it really that hard to answer the officer's question without coming off as a prick?   What possible harm would come from telling the truth right off the bat instead of being confrontational?  

[battleop]

The cop was doing what he was sworn to do.  He started by asking a question to which the guy gave a smart ass answer knowing good and well what he was doing.  This isn't the first fight that Sgt. C.J. Grisham has picked with someone.

[Guest MilitiaMan]

He's sworn to approach people who are not commiting a crime (based on a call or calls from "scared' sheeple) or doing anything illegal and violate their 4th Amendment rights but grabbing their personal belongings and illegally detaining him with no probable cause?

 

Hmm. Interesting. I know that's what most cops think they can do. But I'm sure the law and the Constitution says otherwise.

 

 

 

The cop was doing what he was sworn to do.  He started by asking a question to which the guy gave a smart ass answer knowing good and well what he was doing.  This isn't the first fight that Sgt. C.J. Grisham has picked with someone.

[RichardR]

IMHO thuggery is thuggery, regardless of who the thug is, or the reasons the thug is doing it.

[Daniel]

"He then asked me what I’m doing with the rifle, to which I responded in a calm manner, “Does it matter, officer? Am I breaking the law?” "

 

 

Was it really that hard to answer the officer's question without coming off as a prick?   What possible harm would come from telling the truth right off the bat instead of being confrontational?  

 

"Grisham said his boy was traumatized by the incident.

 

“Every time he sees a police officer he has a panic attack,” he said. “That’s unfortunate because we always taught our kids to respect police officers. My wife and I are angry about it.”

 

 

That's code for "I've won the lottery!  I'm suing for 10000000000000000 bucks".

The particular Soldier in this instance is the blogger over at This aint hell but you can see it from here. http://thisainthell.us/

 

The guy can exercise his rights without having to justify himself. 

[diablo982]

I just did a little research on Texas laws. Texas prohibits open carry of handguns, but its not so clear on long guns. Here's what texasgunlaws.org says:

"Q: Can I carry a firearm on my person?

A: Yes, with proper licensing (Concealed Handgun License) you may carry a pistol or revolver on your person so long as it remains concealed. Long guns (rifles / shotguns) do not have to be concealed, but must be carried in a manner not calculated to cause alarm, and do not require a license."

So causing alarm is subjective, however the officer was dispatched because someone was alarmed by a man walking down the road with a rifle slung to his chest. Honestly, the officer can't say, "Screw this; I'm not going to even check this out." He has a duty to find out if its a Boy Scout march or a deranged gunman looking to kill LEO's. Put yourself in the officer's shoes. How would you interact with a completely unknown person with an AR at the ready? Would things be handled differently if the rifle was over his shoulder? I bet most people on this board could shoulder the weapon and get three rounds off in no time. Could things been handled better by both sides? Absolutely. I just didn't get the feeling the officers were acting out of control from the video portion I saw. Edited April 17, 2013 by diablo982

[battleop]

The particular Soldier in this instance is the blogger over at This aint hell but you can see it from here. http://thisainthell.us/

 

The guy can exercise his rights without having to justify himself. 

 

The guy is an attention whore.  Instead of just answering a question or two and going on about his business he decided to pick a fight with the officer.  Then he has to tell us about his poor little boy who is sooooo traumatized that has a panic attack at the sigh of a police officer.  Bullshit, I call complete bullshit on that.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Okay, maybe he is an attention whore, your words. Did he do anything illegal? Was the officer justified in his

actions? I don't think the officer had any communication skills, or knew how to determine a threat, either.

A man walking down the road is also different from "a man dragging some kid down the road". Too much

subjectivity here.

 

I guess there are some places to avoid in Texas, also. Temple, just like Dan suggests to the military.

[RichardR]

The guy is an attention whore. Instead of just answering a question or two and going on about his business he decided to pick a fight with the officer. Then he has to tell us about his poor little boy who is sooooo traumatized that has a panic attack at the sigh of a police officer. Bull####, I call complete bull#### on that.

That's just it though, the guy was minding his own business, he had a right to be where he was, he had a right to be armed & since he wasn't suspected of committing a violation of any ordinance or statute he also had the right to be left alone.

An officer's authority over others begins when an officer has a reasonable suspicion to believe a violation of an ordinance or statute has occured.

If there is no reasonable suspicion, there is no authority.

This particular instance appears to be one of an officer over-stepping his authority to detain & arrest someone just because the officer didn't like a citizen exerting their individual sovereignty.

[BigK]

That's just it though, the guy was minding his own business, he had a right to be where he was, he had a right to be armed & since he wasn't suspected of committing a violation of any ordinance or statute he also had the right to be left alone.

An officer's authority over others begins when an officer has a reasonable suspicion to believe a violation of an ordinance or statute has occured.

If there is no reasonable suspicion, there is no authority.

This particular instance appears to be one of an officer over-stepping his authority to detain & arrest someone just because the officer didn't like a citizen exerting their individual sovereignty.

 

I agree completely, but would add that a phone call from some hand-wringing ninny because they were scared doesn't mean the cops have a duty OR a right to act unless they have PC that a law is being broken.

 

If I called to report a person smoking, do they have a right to roll up and man-handle them, search them, seize their property for inspection, and detain them on the outside chance it might be dope instead of a Winston? Just because they got a phone call? Hell no, they don't.

 

They have a right to watch them, make attempts to figure out the situation, and then decide, based on their training and THE LAW, whether they even have a reason to take action.

Edited April 18, 2013 by BigK