What wrong in this AR-15 picture..unlawfully detained

Today I had some extra time on my hands and did some websmurfing. That means it can take me anywhere... And then I stunmbled onto this one. I do not know much about what the law is when it comes to carrying an AR-15 in the open but have the impression this army vet does.

Anyways, if this guy is right and those 3 cops wrong the Temple police department must be a bunch of amateurs and best to be avoided. Can it be that their sergeant know his colleague is wrong but refuses to admit it?



It is a pitty we do not see the entire incident so we can be completely sure, the vet seems to be a rational and honest person tho.

It has been a year since the incident. Did a quick search, MODS... If someone else posted this before..please delete this thread.

I'm disappointed in the video and the guy with the gun.

If you want to go out trolling for cops, and looking for a fight
you will get one....but what have you accomplished?

Have you shown the police the error of their ways? Have you
asserted your superior intellect and knowledge of the law
over the lowly public servant?

Nope...but you have made an ass of yourself.

If you want to assert your right-to-carry then do so. If you get
detained remain calm, keep your yap shut, and videotape.
If it turns out you were detained unlawfully THEN GO PICK YOUR
FIGHT. Do it in a court of law. Do it where the buck stops.
Set a precedent and cause some change from within the police
department.

Go ahead and stand up for what you believe in, but do it the most
useful way....bantering with cops at the scene IS ALWAYS a bad idea.

a reply to: rival

I'm disappointed in the video and the guy with the gun.

If you want to go out trolling for cops, and looking for a fight you will get one....but what have you accomplished?

That guy was looking for the exact type of attention he got. He's a walking false flag.

What's really a shame (if you know) is he's at a military pay grade achieved by only 15% of folks who enlist in the Army.

What comes to my mind is how once upon a time people did not get all scared when they saw someone with a gun. Kids would have their shotguns on school grounds because they were in a trap and skeet club or they were going hunting after school. Please don't give me that "it's a assault rifle in the vid" line. It's the perception and a AR-15 is just as deadly as a bolt action rifle or a pump action shot gun.

I always found the gun thing in the US a bit intimidating ,but I am from Canada where we usually carry a box of beer .Much less threatening .

Here's the original video:


The soldier's name is CJ Grisham. You can read what happened to him after this here.

Fort Hood Master Sergeant C.J. Grisham has been ordered by a jury to pay a $2,000 fine without having to serve any jail time after he was convicted on a charge of interfering with police duties.

He's also made a bit of a career out of the incident becoming founder/CEO of Open Carry Texas.

Edit to add dashcam footage:

Interfering with police duties? What duties? Arresting people without charges?

From the start of the clip the man with the guns is openly hostile. His voice was stressed and clearly agitated which I would imagine is just cause as the man states himself while being detained. Honestly the dude is an ass and the Leo's were actually relatively nice but said some dumb things themselves.

I would have been embarrassed as his child standing there, that said, I am still a proponent of firearms for various reasons that I'm not going to get into other than to state, if others have them I will too. My state is an open carry state and I still wouldn't be surprised to be stopped and asked what I was doing. Regardless of your rights, truth is, walking around with an AR-15 over your shoulder and then getting into a dick pissing contest is going to end up this way or worse.

originally posted by: rival
I'm disappointed in the video and the guy with the gun.

If you want to go out trolling for cops, and looking for a fight
you will get one....but what have you accomplished?

Have you shown the police the error of their ways? Have you
asserted your superior intellect and knowledge of the law
over the lowly public servant?

Nope...but you have made an ass of yourself.

If you want to assert your right-to-carry then do so. If you get
detained remain calm, keep your yap shut, and videotape.
If it turns out you were detained unlawfully THEN GO PICK YOUR
FIGHT. Do it in a court of law. Do it where the buck stops.
Set a precedent and cause some change from within the police
department.

Go ahead and stand up for what you believe in, but do it the most
useful way....bantering with cops at the scene IS ALWAYS a bad idea.

Don't get me wrong I am against people carrying guns in places where there is no reason to. But... you guys in america have made laws... which are maybe a little out dated and need a suitable upgrade.

It is in my opinion a provocation to carry a gun in the open. Carrying a (full) automatic machinegun in the open where there is a crowd I consider a potential threat. But as I said there are these laws. In my eyes this guy in the OP was doing his thing with his child in a remote location, in his right and fully minding his own busines...no need for humiliation in front of his kid.

The next vid is a kind of worse situation...this guy is carrying his toy in a popoluated area and watch how this cop is applying his concern towards a citizen obeying the law. A different kind of approach and respect...

a reply to: zatara

Hey, I remember when cops acted like that!
Sadly, the ones I've encountered in the past six years have the attitude of the Temple cops. Their fondest wish is to scare and intimidate you and make you go all stupid. They know that if they can make you mad, they have gained control of you.
The poor guy who got hauled off to jail let his emotions overcome his good sense. His military training failed him miserably.
He broke no laws, bothered nobody, would have gone right on bothering nobody, hiking with his son.
You may say he was asking for attention and got it. You are correct. But did he deserve the kind of attention he got? Is that the way you would have treated him had you seen him walking down a deserted Texas road with his son?
Wouldn't you just assume he was watching out for rattlesnakes?

a reply to: zatara

I cant understand how walking down a high street with a loaded assault rifle (regardless if it is single fire or automatic) can be both legal and socially moral?

When someone is asked why they are doing something and their response is "because I can" is not an acceptable answer. Its just ridiculous, its not the wild west any more. The Chinese are not going to invade, there is not going to be a revolution and even if there was some overweight gun touting loon with a superiority complex is not going to last 5 minutes.

If the shtf I would rather be able to run 30 miles with my kit than sit there with an AR15 . Evasion is a much better survival technique than confrontation.

I am not even anti gun, but there is a point in my head where it goes "hang on, this isn't right"

If the cops did not stop them they would not be doing their job.

I always get a kick out the seemingly police-state defending comments like "what did he expect?" and "he's just attention whoring" regarding videos like these.

Okay, so what if he is?

Of the two issues: 1)attention whoring guy and 2)police who either don't know or don't care about what legal or not which one is the real problem?

Mocking or deriding these "attention whores" is akin to saying "sit down and shut up for the glorious state speaks!"

PS, when it comes to inalienable rights the response to why being "because I can" is more than adequate since one of those inalienable rights is to not have to answer stupid questions like "why are you exercising your rights?"

oh well. hopefully his son learns never to be an Arsehole like his father.

Yeah, this guy was being a rude A**hole. I don't know the CCW laws in his state but here in Ohio, we are required to tell an officer immediately that we are licensed and have the weapon present. Not wait until we are asked. He waited WAY to long to tell the officer about the .45 on his side.

Regardless of any laws, I side with the officer on this one. With as many crazy people running around and the mass shootings happening, the officer had every right to question what the hell this idiot was doing. Taking the weapon from the guy was not about rights or laws, its a freaking safety issue. The officer needed to secure the situation is all. He didn't know this guy.

And no, OP, this man was not the least bit rational and calm. The rational and calm thing to do would be to comply until the officer assesses the situation, learns what this guy is doing and then lets him go about his way when everything is in order and the officer see's no laws are being broken. I've been there and done this. I was not detained or arrested.

originally posted by: zetnom
a reply to: zatara

I cant understand how walking down a high street with a loaded assault rifle (regardless if it is single fire or automatic) can be both legal and socially moral?

That is something I also have difficulty to understand. Maybe these gun laws should be adjusted..

originally posted by: rival
I'm disappointed in the video and the guy with the gun.

If you want to go out trolling for cops, and looking for a fight
you will get one....but what have you accomplished?

Have you shown the police the error of their ways? Have you
asserted your superior intellect and knowledge of the law
over the lowly public servant?

Nope...but you have made an ass of yourself.

If you want to assert your right-to-carry then do so. If you get
detained remain calm, keep your yap shut, and videotape.
If it turns out you were detained unlawfully THEN GO PICK YOUR
FIGHT. Do it in a court of law. Do it where the buck stops.
Set a precedent and cause some change from within the police
department.

Go ahead and stand up for what you believe in, but do it the most
useful way....bantering with cops at the scene IS ALWAYS a bad idea.

Rival, while I agree with what you have said you are missing the a big piece of this puzzle. The court of law is designed for the rich, not the average.

"Fighting it out in a court of law" is EXACTLY what the rich and the government want. Because they can ensure that time is on their side and not the average guy. Our system is designed so the average person, more often than not, loses in the court of law. It's usually due to time, money, or both.

If our system was actually designed fairly, fighting it out in a court of law would make sense. Once you step into a court room, the average person should always expect an up hill battle and to lose.

Yeah, this guy was being a rude A**hole. I don't know the CCW laws in his state but here in Ohio, we are required to tell an officer immediately that we are licensed and have the weapon present. Not wait until we are asked. He waited WAY to long to tell the officer about the .45 on his side. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here we are to show the carry/conceal permit and surrender the weapon immediately. You hand the officer your license, insurance card and photo identification carry/conceal permit at the same time and tell the officer where the weapon is in any kind of traffic stop.

One of the things the "anti-cop" crowd forgets is that the police have a job to do: protecting the community that employs them. With respect to the 2nd video, 3 males walking down the street with weapons displayed is the biggest threat to the community's peace, even if they are obviously just law students testing the bounds of police restraint.

The Colorado, Arizona, and Oregon shooters all share one factor: no cop asked them for ID or background info BEFORE the bloodbath.

So the police are partly just doing the job of determining who is a threat on a given day.

I think you can help a good cop do his job without "becoming a slave in a slave state." Especially if you really ARE just law students making a web video.

Even if the cop in the second video didn't get IDs, he performed his job by ascertaining their motivation, which is part of determining the level of the potential threat to his community.

At some point, it is unconscionable to make the public fearful---justice Holmes compared it to shouting "fire" in a crowded theater (Schenck v. United states). What about walking around in a non-gun-toting neighborhood, and refusing to give ID?

originally posted by: tovenar
One of the things the "anti-cop" crowd forgets is that the police have a job to do: protecting the community that employs them. With respect to the 2nd video, 3 males walking down the street with weapons displayed is the biggest threat to the community's peace, even if they are obviously just law students testing the bounds of police restraint.

Even more so if it's three armed cops walking around a peaceful protest. Obviously, they are just there to start trouble. Maybe we should just start citizen-arresting police officers who walk around displaying their guns. Be sure to charge them with resisting arrest if they refuse to show ID that has their home address on it.

originally posted by: zetnom
a reply to: zatara

I cant understand how walking down a high street with a loaded assault rifle (regardless if it is single fire or automatic) can be both legal and socially moral?

When someone is asked why they are doing something and their response is "because I can" is not an acceptable answer. Its just ridiculous, its not the wild west any more. The Chinese are not going to invade, there is not going to be a revolution and even if there was some overweight gun touting loon with a superiority complex is not going to last 5 minutes.

If the shtf I would rather be able to run 30 miles with my kit than sit there with an AR15 . Evasion is a much better survival technique than confrontation.

I am not even anti gun, but there is a point in my head where it goes "hang on, this isn't right"

If the cops did not stop them they would not be doing their job.

If it's legal and no one is threatened or endangered, in a free society, "because I can" should be the right answer.


There are many things we tolerate in a free society, even if we find them "icky." The free speech shenanigans of the westboro Baptist church come to mind.