Active Duty Soldier Disarmed & Arrested by Temple Texas Police (Illegal Search?)

Discussion in 'Sports & Outdoors' started by ChevyFan, Apr 18, 2013.

  1. ChevyFan

    ChevyFan The Sheriff Staff Member 5+ Years 1000 Posts

    What are we coming to in this country when someone who's not breaking any laws is arrested in front of his own kid by a "law enforcement officer" who clearly doesn't care what the law is. This is very disturbing that this could happen, not in an urban area like New York City, but out in an area that we used to this was safe from this type of treatment.

    I've seen the video and the hiker is slightly arrogant and fairly glib, but he is quicker on his feet than the officer. However, to give him the charges that were filed against him I think were improper. The officer does have the right to question people, in fact I like that in an officer. I think that he should have seen that a father and a son who were walking in the country on (I assume) a Boy Scout 10k hike had taken along a rifle for protection against wild animals.

    Now, I'm NOT active duty military, and I would have slung it over my shoulder to make it easier to carry and to give me more freedom with my hands. However, his training has probably been such to keep it in front of him. It's a different style of carry, and it's probably a 6/half-a-dozen argument for that.

    Last edited: Apr 18, 2013
  2. SurrealOne

    SurrealOne Former Member ROTM Winner 1000 Posts

    If there was an actual call/complaint about him walking with that rifle, the officers had a right to stop him and question him -- but if they found that he was not violating the law and they did not feel threatened by him, then they would not have any right to demand his name (they'd demand it, anyway, but he could refuse), to search him, or to disarm him.

    His failure to remain calm ... in the form of arguing, shouting, and insulting the officers (example: "well if you felt threatened you're a sorry excuse for a police officer") is enough to be arrested on the charge of resisting arrest. He'll need to substantiate that his civil rights were violated ... and that footage doesn't help him, as his demeanor suggests someone amped up and angry ... with a gun ... who is argumentative. I'd have disarmed someone in that state, too, if I were a cop.

    Had he managed to maintain his composure and refrain from insults ... and treated the officers with respect while holding calmly and firmly to his rights ... this might have had a different outcome.
  3. ChevyFan

    ChevyFan The Sheriff Staff Member 5+ Years 1000 Posts

    Yeah, but being amped up and argumentative isn't a crime and it's not a cause for being arrested. I know people who are like that all the time, and they're annoying but they're not a threat to anyone. I think this guy had a point to prove and is an activist looking (maybe hoping) for publicity on the subject.

    Now that I've had a cup of coffee to look it over, it's still got to come down to the fact that we're a nation of laws and not a nation of men. Did they have the right to disarm him ... I'm not so sure about that, all of the language that I've read talks about concealed carry laws, not rifles. I'm sure there is a provision in Texas state code, but I'd have to look it up.
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2013
  4. tbplus10

    tbplus10 Epic Member Staff Member 5+ Years 5000 Posts Platinum Contributor

    One problem the police have is to be arrested for resisting arrest without further charges leaves them in the position of having to defend their actions. I dont remember the case but charges of that type are considered a violation of civil rights. Then theirs a few other civil rights violations like the removal of his weapon.

    Grisham did make 1 mistake when he didnt immediately disclose he had another weapon and a concealed carry but he did disclose it before they had a chance to find the weapon and under the circumstances his disclosure might be considered the first chance.

    Im sure the Temple police will lose this case in court especially after they searhed his wallet after being told not to wallet is an extension and all of his resisting could be cosidered to avoid illegal search ans seizure of his person.

    But the video does show over zealous police will do what they want and when on camera atemmpt to justify or avoid what happened. Being a vet really has no bearing on the situation other than the fact hes had training to handle weapons the basic rights are those of any legal U. S. citizen.
  5. SurrealOne

    SurrealOne Former Member ROTM Winner 1000 Posts

    Texas is a 'duty to inform' state? That surprises me.

    This is an excellent point. A good attorney will probably argue it that, way, too. Still, had he remained calm I suspect there'd have been a different outcome.
  6. Pikey

    Pikey Moderator Staff Member 5+ Years ROTM Winner 5000 Posts

    The guy may have been well within his rights. I don't know the laws in Texas. That being said, I have witnessed that mouthing off or getting loud with a police officer gets you nowhere and destroys most of the credibility that you may have had. If his rights were being violated he would have had a much stronger case if he was not mouthing off to the officers. After watching the video I want to deem this guy one of the "Cause i can" guys. Sure, he may have been within his rights, but as Steve said walking down the side of the road with a gun in front of him like that may have been the reason someone called, it can look threatening. Put it over his shoulder and this may have never happened. I live very close to a state owned hunting area. There are always guys walking down the shoulder of the road with a rifle over their shoulders. I have a feeling that if they were being carried the other way people would have a negative reaction. A few days after Michigan changed it's open carry law I was in Meijer (kind of like walmart) with my family. Three guys walked in wearing cut off jean shorts and sleeveless confederate flag shirts (not seen very often in that area considering it is about 2 miles away from a city primarily occupied by african americans) with about 6 teeth between all three. They all had desert eagles strapped to their legs! They were not shopping they would just walk from area to area to stand and talk, waiting to look at peoples' reactions. No one said anything until the manager walked over to them and ask what they were in the store to do as they were not shopping. One of the guys quickly responded with "I am within my rights to be here with my gun exposed" The manager said "I did not say anything about your gun, I feel as if you are loitering" the man then went into a rant about his rights and that he was doing it because he can. The police came, removed the men and I was told that they were given a ticket for loitering.
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2013
  7. ChevyFan

    ChevyFan The Sheriff Staff Member 5+ Years 1000 Posts

    yeah, I agree with that statement. If this guy were to have remained calm and just told them that he was out on a hike with his kid ... even considering the fact that his rifle was slung around his chest (which I would find alarming if I were out hiking with my kids and I saw someone coming at me with what looks like an AR-15 being carried like that) ... I think they would have asked to see it (which I'm not sure they can do, that's still another gray area if he's not considered a threat to himself or to someone else) and then let him go on his merry way. Remember the cops got a call about someone carrying an assault rifle, they would have been remiss to NOT have answered the call and gone to figure it all out.
  8. SurrealOne

    SurrealOne Former Member ROTM Winner 1000 Posts

    Front carry of the rifle makes perfect sense as the guy has a pack on. That's the usual reason for front-slung rifles, by the way, whether military or civilian -- i.e. there's already shouldered gear.

    To those with firearm experience, HOW he carries the rifle is no big deal as long as it's pointed in a safe direction at all times -- but to the general public (which tends to lack firearm experience), front-slung or hand-carried rifles may seem to be an oddity.

    Kifaru makes a gunbearer accessory for use with packs that allows you to carry UNDER the shoulder (which is actually a very natural place to put it). It keeps the muzzle pointed up, it's actually faster to deploy than a front-slung firearm that is hanging from its sling, and it's far less obtrusive in the civlian world than a front-slung rifle. Both hunters and tactical folks, alike, use them.

    That guy should probably invest in one. :)
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 18, 2013
  9. Pikey

    Pikey Moderator Staff Member 5+ Years ROTM Winner 5000 Posts

    I agree with you surrealone. Perception is the key in a case like this. If someone in the general public sees this man walking down the road with a front slung weapon and perceives it as threatening (although no threat may have been intended), they call the police. The police pull up and also perceive this as threatening. Now we have the issue at hand. We don't know where he had the weapon pointed or if he was walking down the road with his hand on the grip, that could be perceived as even more threatening to the general public. If the man had a system like the one you posted in the video then I would think that the problem may have never happened.
  10. reggiecab2000

    reggiecab2000 Epic Member 5+ Years 1000 Posts

    its situations like these where I think a simple traffic law or civil rights class should be taught as core curriculum classes in either high school or college so that people have confidence in knowing their rights. of course google is pretty quick on getting some fast answers though you never have a verified source most of the time. So many tiny things in this video, one thing [MENTION=50075]SurrealOne[/MENTION] pointed out was how the attitude gets this veteran nowhere..
    Though legally speaking you can talk in any manner you like whether it be shouting, yelling, cussing (freedom of speech/expression,etc.)...
    when its towards a man who has the power to arrest you for any simple reason, its not going to help your cause at all, in fact only make them more eager to arrest you.

    One example i can provide is that while i was 21, I was riding in a truck with friends down the highway and one of my drunk (minor) friends shouted out to a group of police at a gas station investigating a simple "fender bender" "**** the police"...

    there was a good distance of about 200 feet and we were on a overpass driving over the street the gas station was on.

    needless to say the police jumped in their cars chased us down to the very next stoplight, and got everyone out of the car to question them... after about 20 minutes of questioning they decided to "detain" me as I asked to make sure I was not being arrested since I had not committed any kind of crime... also the fact that I wasnt the one who said it.
    after another few minutes I was placed in the squad car and the officer asked if i had been drinking at all during the day, I answered "yes, and my last drink was more than 4 hours ago", he simply replied your going to jail for public intoxication and shut the door before I could respond with any comment. Not a single person admitted to saying the comment **** the police, but like proven in this case if you give them a reason to be embarassed or give them a reason to "prove their power" so to speak, they will make sure of ruining your night...

    alas, as I was in the back of the squad car, while the cops drove 95 mph down the highway no lights, siren, or anything, I witnessed and observed the the two cops(buddies) in the front seat, were typing up the incident report, and they kept reediting the summary of what happened with me, I was reading the entire report from start to finish, according to the last edit I saw,

    these were my (completely sober) actions according to the police:

    could not stand on my own feet, required assistance
    couldnt maintain eye contact
    reaked of alcohol
    any many many more complete lies they wrote to "spiff" up their report

    I already have gotten a lawyer, subpoenaed the dash cam footage, etc. still pending court hearing (6 months later)... lawyer assured me from what he saw ill be off since I had done nothing wrong, and even told me that if was was the one who said **** the police, they still would have no right to arrest me for just those three words, though they would probably try and find a reason...

    So I think its good when videos like this get posted because it should motivate people to want to know more about their civil rights and know exactly how to exercise them when presented with such a situation...

    I believe, from what was in the video, if this guy gets a good lawyer he'll get off scott-free.

    sorry ive been holding onto that story for awhile now, had to get it out...

Share This Page

Newest Gallery Photos