The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 21, 2013, 01:41 PM   #126
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,405
Quote:
One was passing by, and stopped me. He was friendly, and asked me to put the weapon in the back seat of his car while things were checked out. I did so. He did a pat down search, then asked me what I was doing
And this is where people are starting to object. I think you had a Terry Stop in pretty much the reverse order. You were stopped and frisked, and THEN questioned.

It's supposed to be Stop Question and Frisk.

There would also be some objection to reasonably suspecting criminal activity is likely when seeing an individual with a hunting arm in such close proximity to known hunting grounds.

If I go to prison the gigantic substandard neighbor, ironically nick-named Tiny, attempting to make me his girlfriend can be as nice as can be- that doesn't mean I'm going to enjoy the process, OR find it particularly lawful.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 21, 2013, 01:43 PM   #127
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,390
Right, so we are back to the aspect that the police do in fact have the legal ability to disarm you. We don't know what happened before the video started rolling other than Grisham's account and that is only one side of the story. Regardless of who Grisham is, we have all seen people in high positions, positions of authority, positions of respect, cops, military, politicians, CEOs, parents, etc. tell lies. That isn't to say that he is lying, only that credentials aren't proof of what he is claiming.

The cops are claiming he would not comply. To a certain extent, Grisham clearly backed up their claim and Grisham, like Ersland, may have been exceptionally stupid in speaking to the media.

On Genn Beck, Grisham states plainly he would not be disarmed,
Quote:
"What the hell do you think you are doing. ... You are not going to disarm me."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gy3Sw8APRQo

At that point, there is a definite problem as Grisham is on record as stating he would not allow himself to be disarmed. What is then in question is what happened before that point. It isn't on video. Nobody here knows what happened. No doubt, it will come out in court. If the officers' actions can be shown to be legal, Grisham loses. If not legal, then no doubt the cops will lose and Grisham will likely end up with a nice settlement. However, Grisham would have been very smart to exercise his right to remain silent and not speak with the media.

However, arguing over what is going on in the video is pretty silly since the video isn't the critical part of the situation.

I did have to laugh at the indignation Grisham showed, however, that the cops should have known he a combat veteran because he had a boonie cap with his rank on it. My boonie cap says I am a Sgt. as well. It was the only used boonie cap that fit me at the Army/Navy store. I wear it when I mow the lawn.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old April 21, 2013, 02:19 PM   #128
m&p45acp10+1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 3,307
Jim it is acceptable for an officer to frisk before questioning for officer safety. He did ask if I had any other weapons on my person. I told him I had a pocket knife, and a pair of siscors in my pocket for breasting dove. He did ask before frisking me. I did consent. He was being friendly, and never at any point did I sense any hostility from him at any point in time.

Truth be told if you were a cop, and you were responding to the same type of call, and the person had a chip on the shoulder attitude towards you, and was visably armed, and refusing to cooperate it is hard to say that one would not have done similar to what happened. I am not justifying what the officer did. I can not hear what is being said, and can not find a captioned version. To me it seams all were wrong in many ways.
__________________
No matter how many times you do it and nothing happens it only takes something going wrong one time to kill you.
m&p45acp10+1 is offline  
Old April 21, 2013, 03:06 PM   #129
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
The interesting thing is, in the limited interactions I have had with LEOs while carrying, once I have let them know I have a permit and exercise it, they have been content to say, "Ok, just leave it holstered."

I do not believe there is any requirement for a LEO to disarm an armed citizen; I do believe they should have some reason aside from general officer safety precautions to do so.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 21, 2013, 03:56 PM   #130
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,390
Right, no requirement to disarm, but they can do it.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 12:32 AM   #131
angel1495
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 29, 2011
Posts: 3
Wow. Six pages of comments. Not one quote of Texas law.

I am going to guess that many people commenting are basing what they are writing on their OWN states law.

Do a Google search. You might be surprised what you find.

I am serious. See if I am mistaken. Go to everything from the state's own website to the NRA website, to everything in between. Prove me wrong.

Try this for starters. It is in a more user friendly format, easily found using a Google search, taken from the Free Republic, dated on Saturday, April 16, 2011:

"Texas is a traditionally rough-and-tumble state that has some of the most permissive guns laws in the country. But you may be surprised to learn that it is illegal to carry a gun openly there.

"Texas is one of just seven states -- the others are Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, New York, Oklahoma and South Carolina, plus Washington, D.C. -- that does not have an open-carry law.

"Gun advocates are trying to get the state legislature to pass an open-carry law, but so far it has been unable to do so.

"It's shocking that Texas, with its history of rugged individualism that the state symbolizes, doesn't allow open carry," John Pierce, a co-founder of OpenCarry.org told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

"Texans have been able to get licenses to carry concealed handguns in most places since 1995. However, carrying them openly remains illegal.

"Texas Gov. Rick Perry doesn't shy away from his love of guns -- he admitted he takes his gun along with him on jogs, last year shooting a coyote that threatened his dog. The governor said he would consider an open-carry bill if it landed on his desk".

And yes, I have read those things about, "long guns".
angel1495 is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 01:03 AM   #132
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
^ lol, if you're going to harp on not posting the law...perhaps you should actually post the law and not random excerpts of articles, which don't address the issue at hand.

Long gun open carry is generally(I don't know if there's preemption and/or grandfathered laws from counties/cities that prohibit it) legal in Texas.

Quote:
Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:
(1) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or
(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control.
(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which:
(1) the handgun is in plain view; or
Source

Notice how it only addresses handguns?
sigcurious is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 10:00 AM   #133
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,646
San Antonio has a local ordinance against long gun carry. The SAPD says they would enforce it. It was written to bust gang members who in the days of cheap SKS rifles would drive around with them.

Is it 'constitutional' given state law - hasn't been tested to my knowledge?
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 10:08 AM   #134
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
angel1495, the article you cited was handgun specific, and probably old, too - since California was not on their list, and CA recently banned OC.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 11:19 AM   #135
I'vebeenduped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Location: AZ
Posts: 200
This is interesting. So, is his case room temperature now?

http://www.texasgunlaws.org/

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.

Q: Can I strap a gun on my hip in Texas?

A: No, with some exceptions. Open carry is not legal in Texas, but you may open carry on your own property, in the commission of a sporting activity (competition, shooting ranges, etc.), and while engaged in hunting.
__________________
The natural state of man, the way G‑d created us, is to be happy.
Look at children and you will see
I'vebeenduped is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 11:26 AM   #136
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
I'vebeenduped, I'd say that bit you highlighted would be subjective.

Since the charges were all reduced to a count of interfering with the performance of a LEO, and not a weapons charge, I don't think the prosecutor felt a single point sling was calculated to cause alarm.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 11:32 AM   #137
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,405
If it was, a guy wearing boxers, or going "commando" would have the same problems in mixed company. Muzzle sweeping people while hiking might cause alarm. Having your rifle with you, swinging on the end of a single point sling- not even in your hands, should not be considered alarming for reasonable people in rural areas that may reasonably contain predatory animals.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 11:32 AM   #138
I'vebeenduped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Location: AZ
Posts: 200
MLeake,
I agree with what you are saying. However, I think that angel1495 made a good point about posting the laws of Texas before the debate. I believe that I did err in making a case for the MSG before knowing the Texas law. That was pretty stupid. I try to do better than that. I am still trying to find something more definitive to post since the link that I posted stated that it was not really authoritative.

David
__________________
The natural state of man, the way G‑d created us, is to be happy.
Look at children and you will see
I'vebeenduped is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 11:35 AM   #139
I'vebeenduped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Location: AZ
Posts: 200
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u.../htm/PE.42.htm
(8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;

This pretty much reaffirms it.
__________________
The natural state of man, the way G‑d created us, is to be happy.
Look at children and you will see
I'vebeenduped is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 11:47 AM   #140
I'vebeenduped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Location: AZ
Posts: 200
JimDandy,
"should not be considered alarming for reasonable people in rural areas that may reasonably contain predatory animals."

I am in the choir here! I feel the same way that you do. The problem is; who's decision is it to determine this? I think that it is up to the officer in this case. Think about this; there was an individual who was "alarmed" enough to call the police for the way the MSG was carrying his weapon. Is this a ridiculous law? I think so. Was the MSG right? If he was in AZ probably yes. In TX?...
__________________
The natural state of man, the way G‑d created us, is to be happy.
Look at children and you will see
I'vebeenduped is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 12:21 PM   #141
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,405
Quote:
who's decision is it to determine this?
Ultimately, it will have to be determined by the courts. The implication, however, is that since openly carrying a rifle is legal, the cause for alarm must be inherently more than openly carrying a rifle- through actions and demeanor.

If the guy is muzzle sweeping,and running around like he's in a 3 gun competition- ok. But it would be difficult to suggest a guy walking at a lesiurely pace with it appropriately slung was trying to cause alarm.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 01:53 PM   #142
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
I'vebeenduped, while Angel1495 had a good point about posting appropriate statutes, his specific citation did not support his argument. It was specific to handguns.

Meanwhile, while the law could be interpreted to say that Grisham was carrying in a manner that might cause panic, and while you have reaffirmed that the law could be construed to mean that, unless things have changed the local prosecutor has not charged him with unlawful carry. That tells me that prosecutor does not want to make that argument.

If any charges have been added, since they reduced the original ones to interfering with a LEO in performance of his duties, anybody is free to update the current charges.

But it seems to me that prosecutors only reduce charges like that when they suspect the court case isn't so good, and they hope the defendant will accept the lesser misdemeanor in a plea.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 03:43 PM   #143
I'vebeenduped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Location: AZ
Posts: 200
MLeake,
I understand about the prosecutor reducing the charges and the possible reasons for that. I think that my initial rxn would have been different had I armed myself with the Texas statutes. Please don't misunderstand me. I am ALL for people standing up for their civil rights and liberties! YEARS ago, I took a social movements class. It seems like, the only way to induce change is to offend some people in some manner or another. I thought the officers reason, per the recording, at any rate, for arresting the MSG was ridiculous. I think now that, as ridiculous as it is AND sounds, it seems as if it may have at least some legal merit in the state of Texas. I am merely conceding that point.

I also agree with you in that although Angel1495 did make a good point about citing the law, his arguments were flawed as they only pertained to handguns. I didn't care so much as to point it out. I only wanted to stick with what I found to be constructive as arguments here can, at times, get inflamed easily.

I appreciate your responses. I think that your points are always well thought out. I especially liked your insight in the use of drones argument. You dominated that thread in my opinion!

David
__________________
The natural state of man, the way G‑d created us, is to be happy.
Look at children and you will see
I'vebeenduped is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 05:25 PM   #144
Gaerek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 939
"...not to cause alarm..."

Vague law is vague. Any half way decent lawyer can argue his way out of that one. Seriously.

How do you determine if someone will be/was/is alarmed? Is there a definition for "alarmed." If I were an LEO, could I say that carrying a long gun on your back, muzzle in the air could be alarming? If there were ever a law that needs legal precedent, this is it...
Gaerek is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 05:29 PM   #145
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,405
The standard will be a "reasonable person". WA state has had similar stuff happen. One published, one unpublished. Precedent is needed, because one "Reasonable" person isn't as good as another, but it's better than anybody's guess.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 05:30 PM   #146
markchadwick
Junior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2008
Posts: 12
Playing devil's advocate here, but does anyone think that the Aurora and Newtown shootings, involving AR-15's with 30 rd mags (100rd drum in the case of Aurora) had anything to do with the cops detaining Grisham?

Maybe not a good idea to walk around with such a weapon, legal or not, in light of some terrible mass shootings involving similar guns.

I dont think any cop wants to be the one who lets a guy walk around with an AR-15, legal or not, and then finds out later said guy just shot up a public place.
markchadwick is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 05:47 PM   #147
m&p45acp10+1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 3,307
I do not think the shooting had anything to do with his arrest at all. I live in the town of Temple. Where he was is not very rural, and there is a ton of traffic on the road in that area. A passer by called 911. That is a causing alarm when someone calls police about it. I wrote in on of my precious post about my experice with TPD when being stopped, and visably armed. The SGT refused to turn over his weapons while the police were sorting things out. It is very legal for an officer to have the person turn over the weapon for the duration of a stop for officer safety.

The SGT had a chip on the shoulder I know better than you attitude with police, and refused to comply while visably armed with the weapon in front of him. If he is luck he will pay a fine, and get probation for the misdemenor.
__________________
No matter how many times you do it and nothing happens it only takes something going wrong one time to kill you.
m&p45acp10+1 is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 06:22 PM   #148
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 3,593
I understand the arguements on both sides.I think they all did poorly.

The application of courtesy would have gone a long way,I think.

I can be approached by an LEO,and I think"This guy wants to see his family again"

That does not mean I lay down and wet myself,it means I defer to his security,as a courtesy.How I move,what I do with my hands,when I say"I have that in the console,OK to open it?

I do what I can to let him/her just do their job.Checking out a man with an AR,might be his job.

I know I will never,ever win a power struggle with an LEO.They just cannot be effective by backing down.

If there is problem,it reasonable to state it."Am I detained?Am I free to go?"

You might find a bad LEO,one just pulled a gun because McDonalds was moving too slow.

File a complaint,use the system,sue,fine.

But,IMO,in the moment,in the field,a cockroach who argues with a chicken is always wrong.
HiBC is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 08:05 PM   #149
Alabama Shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
Quote:
But it seems to me that prosecutors only reduce charges like that when they suspect the court case isn't so good, and they hope the defendant will accept the lesser misdemeanor in a plea.
If he is convicted of a felony they will throw him out of the Army. With a misdemeanor he can still lose his clearance depending upon the circumstances, his level and the adjudicator. So they might be trying to go easy on him.
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday.
Alabama Shooter is offline  
Old April 22, 2013, 08:21 PM   #150
WillyKern69
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 160
He is a Hero, with a capital H.
WillyKern69 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14356 seconds with 9 queries