The full video on Mr Grishams arrest

[Younggun]

This idea that we must either side fully with the officer idiot or the citizen idiot is ridiculous. Anyone who does so is choosing to ignore half of the video as well as half the facts.

 

[M. Sage]

So it looks like the waterboys aee going to ignore the fact that the cop acted unprofessionally and needlessly escalated the situation through his laziness, stupidity and arrogance.

 

[M. Sage]

It's funny how you can find fault with every action of the police officer, but defend Grisham completely.

Grisham is responsible for how this incident played out, pure and simple. He could have easily been cooperative and compliant with the officer and none of this would have transpired. No, he had to be hostile and combative from the onset, hence why he ended up in cuffs and was convicted on charges of interfering with a public official; which is the appropriate charge for his actions.

I have no sympathy for him, despite his intentions. There are smarter ways to prove a point, but deliberately getting into fights with the cops isn't going to do him or his "cause" any good. But I honestly don't think that's his goal, he's more intent to make a name for himself and doesn't care how he does it!

I wonder what his commanding officer and first sergeant think of his civil disturbances?!?

Pick up that can! Because blind obedience is the answer. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear!

I'm not defending Grisham, for all I know you're right about his desire to be arrested. What I'm doing is attacking the bad actions of that moron cop. Who was it in that encounter that was rude and confrontational first? Hint: not Grisham.

My point is that just because someone is looking for a fight doesn't mean you give them one. The cop handled the situation very poorly to the point I would characterize it as incompetence. Unfortunately the attitude he displayed in the video suggests that he's only employable in the public sector, because the way he acted doesn't fly in the real world.

 

[ROGER4314]

Neither one of the parties deserve a pat on the back. It goes back to Flash's rules of trouble. If you go LOOKING for trouble, you will surely find it!

Flash

 

[majormadmax]

The bottom line is that there is no legal requirement for the police officer to be "nice" in executing his duties, and he was well within his authority when disarming Grisham and Grisham resisted.

Attitude opinions aside, it all comes down to who acted legally and who broke the law; and the fact that one was convicted while the other remains on the force should be a clue as to who was who!

 

[Shotgun Jeremy]

Yea, because there's no such thing as officers watching out for each other and juries being forced into a decision.

 

[dsukid]

and he was well within his authority

Really, when the non emergency line call specifically stated that he was simply walking down the road and not doing anything threatening? Can you explain one ioata of reasonable suspicion that he was planning on committing, committing, or committed a crime? Since when can a police officer stop or detain simply to question without resonable suspicion? Is a man with a gun or an armed citizen an instant exigent circumstance? Nobody told me! That pesky part of the Constitution about no search or seizure without probable cause...irrelevant!

 

[majormadmax]

Really, when the non emergency line call specifically stated that he was simply walking down the road and not doing anything threatening? Can you explain one ioata of reasonable suspicion that he was planning on committing, committing, or committed a crime? Since when can a police officer stop or detain simply to question without resonable suspicion? Is a man with a gun or an armed citizen an instant exigent circumstance? Nobody told me! That pesky part of the Constitution about no search or seizure without probable cause...irrelevant!

Yes, really. A peace officer in the state of Texas has the right to disarm anyone for his or their own safety. While it is rare that an officer will do so, Grisham's hostile attitude toward the officer led to it.

As I said, I had a similar encounter with a SAPD officer where someone claimed I was shooting at a billboard. The officer did not disarm me most likely due to my cooperative attitude. I even offered to allow him to inspect the rifle to ensure it had not been fired, but he declined.

There's a lesson there for those who will open their eyes to realize it!

 

[dsukid]

While making a stop. To make a stop you have to have a Reasonable Articulated Suspicion. Walking with a gun.....no RAS. Did you see the dash cam video, the officer clearly initiated.

 

[dsukid]

Say you have your rifle and you are sitting in a lawn chair in your yard. A officer on routine patrol drives by, sees you sitting in your chair, gets out and asks what it up, and then takes your rifle without saying another word. You belive that would be ok and within his power?

 

[picasso]

Say you have your rifle and you are sitting in a lawn chair in your yard. A officer on routine patrol drives by, sees you sitting in your chair, gets out and asks what it up, and then takes your rifle without saying another word. You belive that would be ok and within his power?

Grishams was not in his yard he was walking down a public road. It wasn't private property and the officer was in his right to disarm Grishams. Nothing in the law says he has to tell him what he's doing. If the officer feels his safety is threatened he doesn't have to say "please" before putting someone on the ground. I don't agree with the way he did it but there was nothing illegal with the way he did it or what he did.

Where this WHOLE thing went wrong was when Grishams said "Because I can". Yes! In fact he could. BUT it was a smart ass comment and that's not something you want to do when you are facing LEO. Everything changed after that comment. Did you hear the officer say "alright" and start to take the gun off of him right after he said that? That was the tipping point for the officer. I'm sure he heard exactly what I did. A defiant tone.

Grishams big mouth and attitude got him into a lot of trouble that didn't have to happen.

 

[dsukid]

It is unlawful for a police officer to stop or detain a citizen unless the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the citizen has committed or is about to commit a crime. The only time an officer is allowed to take any action like disarming an individual is if a citizen is being stopped, detained, or arrested. A police officer cannot disarm, search, handcuff, etc...just to ask questions. In fact, you don't have to answer or cooperate in any manner when they do question. You don't have a legal duty to be polite to an officer. Certainly I think you should be, but the absence of politeness isn't grounds for suspicion.

 

[stdreb27]

It's really simple, Grisham ass hat or not, was illegally detained, disarmed and searched then arrested had his case dismissed, then had a different charge brought against him.
The officer lied in a sworn statement.

Didn't know it was a crime to be an idiot to an officer.

Now I'm of the school that being polite goes a long way. But he did nothing illegal. He needs to pursue this in civil court.

 

[dsukid]

It's really simple, Grisham ass hat or not, was illegally detained, disarmed and searched then arrested had his case dismissed, then had a different charge brought against him.
The officer lied in a sworn statement.

Didn't know it was a crime to be an idiot to an officer.

Now I'm of the school that being polite goes a long way. But he did nothing illegal. He needs to pursue this in civil court.

Exactly!

 

[BrenGunner]

After seeing how Sgt. Grisham conducts himself in person, I don't feel sorry for him. He got good publicity, a slap on the wrist, the whole Alamo event initiated, and now can claim martyr. I have a problem with the larger scope and influence of police in our society. Too many of them, and imho, not enough reasons for their presence other than to hassle and tax ordinary, hard working Americans.

I would highly encourage you to become involved with some local PD officers or S.O in the way of a citizens academy or ride outs. Their existence is not justified by harassing and "Taxing" hard working Americans. 99% ARE hard working Americans who want to help their community by putting criminals away. I guarantee that most agencies are understaffed as is. I believe you would see this if you went out and saw the call volumes and general day to day antics they are involved in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[M. Sage]

The bottom line is that there is no legal requirement for the police officer to be "nice" in executing his duties, and he was well within his authority when disarming Grisham and Grisham resisted.

Attitude opinions aside, it all comes down to who acted legally and who broke the law; and the fact that one was convicted while the other remains on the force should be a clue as to who was who!

You mean like how there's no legal requirement for him to perform any of his "duties" at all?

And I love you you ignore what the cop said, how he said it and how he acted right off the bat tells us. It was obvious the cop knew that this was an open carry thing, and he seemed to be pissed that someone was out there to try and "make him look bad." Where have I heard that line before...? Oh, yeah - our own Chief Kaiser loves parroting it about open carriers.

This is the attitude that kind of thinking breeds. It breeds anger and contempt on the officer's part, it breeds a "I'm gonna **** with this guy to teach him a lesson" mentality, where even when the cop very obviously knows what's going on, he's going to do everything he can to cause discomfort and claim he's doing it for his own safety.

You know why men with integrity don't fear having someone try making them look bad? For the same reason dishonest people who lack integrity get mad and fearful whenever they think someone is trying to test them. Because both men will handle the contrived test the same way they handle every test of their honor. One will handle it well, the other will handle it badly.

The honorable man has nothing to fear from someone trying to goad him into acting dishonorably because that can't happen. Only the dishonorable fear that situation.

 

[TheDan]

My point is that just because someone is looking for a fight doesn't mean you give them one. The cop handled the situation very poorly to the point I would characterize it as incompetence. Unfortunately the attitude he displayed in the video suggests that he's only employable in the public sector, because the way he acted doesn't fly in the real world.

 

[M. Sage]

Hahahaha!

Not if the evidence supports it.

 

[London]

How was he illegally detained?

You can not detain without RAS.

 

[M. Sage]

You can not detain without RAS.

And based on what the officer said as he walked up, it's pretty obvious he didn't think that Grisham was doing anything illegal.