Here is an excerpt from the link of the OP:
Father and son grabbed their gear and headed out on a blustery Saturday morning to hike about 10 miles. They were midway through the trip when Grisham turned around and saw a police car.
“At that point I heard him tell us to hold on a second and he motioned for me and my son to come back,” Grisham said. “He didn’t have his lights on. Everything was calm and casual. He asked what we were doing.”
Grisham had his AR-15 slung around the front of his body — a rifle he’s been using since he joined the military.
At some point the officer pulled his pistol on the father and son and grabbed Grisham’s AR-15.
“He slammed me onto the hood of the car,” he said. “I had my hands straight up and that’s when I saw our camera – and turned it on.”
For the next 15 minutes, Grisham’s son recorded the entire incident.
This is the account as Grisham is telling it. Don't you find it strange that he starts off saying how its all calm and casual, the officer wasn't screeching up with sirens blazing and jumping out guns drawn, then all of a sudden he says the officer draws down and grabbed at Grishams rifle?
Doesn't it seem like something is missing in Grishams account? Is it conceivable that the officer continued being calm and casual and asked Grisham politely to put his rifle down? Do you think that perhaps the officer did feel uneasy talking to someone whose rifle is slung and hooked on the front of their body? Do you think the officer might have been okay with talking to a person whose rifle was slung across their back rather than in a ready to fire position on their front?
Do you find it contradictary for Grisham to later say how he taught his son to respect the police yet he himself couldnt respect an officers request to put the weapon down? Do you really think Grishams rights were violated by being asked to put the weapon down?
Don't answer from blind emotions.