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

The_Outlaw

~The Dude Abides~
Veteran arrested in front of his son & fellow boy scouts for "rude weapon display".

Army Master Sgt. C.J. Grisham was on a ten-mile Boy Scout hike with his son in Texas when he was arrested and accused of “rudely displaying” his firearm. Knowing there are wild boars, coyotes, and cougars in the area, he had an AR-15 rifle slung over his shoulder and was also carrying a .45 caliber pistol, according to Fox News’ Todd Starnes.

A “huge Constitutionalist” and prominent military blogger, Grisham has served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan throughout his 18 years in the military. He was awarded the Bronze Star with Valor for his service.

But on the day he was arrested in mid-March, Grisham says he was treated like a “street thug.”

He described how it all happened:

At about the 5 mile mark of our hike, a voice behind us asked us to stop and the officer motioned for us to approach him. He got out of his car and met us a few feet later. He asked us what we were doing and I explained that we were hiking for my son’s merit badge. 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?”

At that point, the officer grabbed my rifle without warning or indication. He didn’t ask for my rifle and he didn’t suggest he would take it from me. He simply grabbed it. This startled me and I instantly pulled back – the rifle was attached to me – and I asked what he thought he was doing because he’s not taking my rifle. He then pulled his service pistol on me and told me to take my hands off the weapon and move to his car, which I complied with. He then slammed me into the hood of his car and I remembered I had a camera on me (one of the requirements of the hiking merit badge is to document your hikes)…Up to this point, I am not told why I am being stopped, why he tried to disarm me, or even that I’m under arrest.

Grisham’s 15-year-old son recorded the entire incident, and the video is posted on YouTube.
In it, you can see a handcuffed Grisham repeatedly asking what he is being detained for.

“In this day and age people are alarmed when they see someone with what you have [a rifle],” one of the officers replies, noting that someone had called the police. “They don’t care what the law is.”

“Do ​you​ care what the law is?” Grisham shoots back.

The veteran continues to elicit clarification as his hands are handcuffed behind his back, asking why the officers didn’t ask him to drop the weapon instead of resorting to such drastic action.

“I will not be in the habit of doing that for anybody with a firearm, because it’s dangerous,” one of the officers replies.

“So just because a guy’s got a firearm he’s dangerous?” Grisham responds.

“Yes sir,” the officer says.

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.

“What a bad excuse you guys are showing for [the] police force,” Grisham says at one point.

“Actually, it’s a bad excuse as a dad,” one of the officers replies.

Todd Starnes has more:

As the officers put Grisham in the back of the car, the video picked up sounds of [Grisham's son] Chris crying.

The officers told Grisham they would take the boy home.

“I told him not to answer any questions,” Grisham said. “I told him not to answer a single question until his mother was there — and she would answer the questions for him.”

But that’s not what happened.

Chris told Fox News that the police officer refused to let him out of the car until he answered a series of questions. The boy had not been arrested.

“The officer told me that I wasn’t getting out of the patrol car until I answered his questions,” Chris said. “He said I didn’t have a choice. I was scared.”

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.” [Emphasis added]

Chris told Fox News that he wants to be like his dad when he grows up. “He inspires me,” he said, adding that his father “didn’t do anything wrong at all.”

At this point, roughly a month later, Grisham says is still “100 percent confused” about why he was arrested. His charges were downgraded from resisting arrest to interfering with a peace officer while performing a duty, but he still thinks the situation is absurd and inexcusable.

“For me, it’s a difficult turning point,” the decorated veteran said. “I wonder what it is that I’m fighting for. If our basic rights are being violated this way — what is my purpose?”

The entire, unedited video from the scene is worth watching:

Link Removed
 
Another incident that tells me that we should not believe that the police will not take away our guns. There are to many who will do it gleefully.
 
I am sure there some good ones, but in my 51 years of life I have concluded COPS think they are above the law and you should "kiss their ring". These cops should be written up and or terminated. We are innocent until proven guilty. I u der stand they deal with less than desirable people in the job, but come on... Do any of them have any common sense?
 
The cop is lucky that Msgt. Grisham was in a good mood. Methinks those three cops would have died had he chosen to stand his ground. Looks like Grisham learned a lesson. Trust nobody.
 
The cop is lucky that Msgt. Grisham was in a good mood. Methinks those three cops would have died had he chosen to stand his ground. Looks like Grisham learned a lesson. Trust nobody.

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.
 
This will cost their department dearly, nothing illegal about carrying a rifle in Texas, it did break scout regulations.
 
The cop is lucky that Msgt. Grisham was in a good mood. Methinks those three cops would have died had he chosen to stand his ground. Looks like Grisham learned a lesson. Trust nobody.

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.

IIRC, in FL at least, the SYG and Castle doctrine laws frequently note "...except for an LEO in performance of his duties...". I assume no matter how poorly and inappropriately they are being performed.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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:
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,523
Messages
610,662
Members
74,992
Latest member
RedDotArmsTraining
Back
Top