“We live out in the country in Texas, near Temple,” he told me. “My son and I were on a ten-mile hike so that he could earn his hiking merit badge – it’s the last badge he needs to become an Eagle Scout.” But half way into the hike, Grisham said, “a police officer pulled up.” Initially, he was “cordial” and he “asked what we were doing.” Grisham told him. “Then he looked at my rifle. I carry a rifle any time I walk around because there are feral hogs and cougars and things like that.”

From here, things took a turn for the worse.

“We’re exempt from the law” is not a phrase you want to hear from law enforcement in a constitutional republic.
I suggest that this creates a Catch-22: If you comply, you’re giving up your rights; if you don’t, you’ll be punished. He agrees.

  1. Guyver says:

    Is it me or is there an overweight John C. Dvorak doppelgänger in the Youtube thumbnail?

  2. orchidcup says:

    I live near Temple.

    Nobody I know is afraid of feral hogs and cougars to the extent that they would carry an assault weapon to protect themselves.

    A .45 caliber sidearm would be more than enough protection against any wildlife in the area.

    It seems to me this idiot was trying to provoke a confrontation with the police in order to make a point.

    If the idiot had handled the situation differently, the police would have handled the situation differently.

    I think the officers responded appropriately.

    • orchidcup says:

      P.S. It is extremely unlikely that a feral hog or a cougar would attack someone that is hiking through open country.

      Feral Hogs and cougars avoid humans if they can.

      I could hike ten miles across open country near Temple and not feel threatened enough by the wildlife to consider carrying a sidearm, although I would have the right to do so.

      • orchidcup says:

        P.P.S. I challenge anyone to find reports of feral hogs or cougars attacking people while they are hiking through the country near Temple or anywhere in Texas.

        I have encountered feral hogs in south Texas and elsewhere in the open country and I never felt threatened enough to consider needing a firearm.

        The entire video is exaggerated hyperbole intended to convince people that the right to bear arms is under attack by law enforcement and the AntiChrist Obama.

        The video is more amusing than an Alex Jones rant.

    • Gwad his own self says:

      is “should or shouldn’t” your standard of law now?

      It doesn’t really matter WTF he should or shouldn’t have done, or expected, or tried.

      What he did was legal, if you don’t like it you can try (again unsuccessfully) to change the law.

      • pedro says:

        Do not contradict the self-proclaimed owner of common sense, he mightn’t like it.

    • notatall says:

      Glad you think the black shirts acted appropriately. And since you live there, you can enjoy the tax increase you will have to fork over once a jury explains that if your pet pigs get off their leash, it’s you who gets the bill.

  3. tooold says:

    Cup you are a tool.

    • orchidcup says:

      I am a tool of common sense and rational thinking.

      I guess I disappoint you.

      • pedro says:

        You really think you are the voice of common sense?

        A new person gets into my “careful: delusion” list.

        • orchidcup says:

          Thank you.

          Most people that have any common sense are likely to be considered delusional.

          The problem with common sense is that it is not all that common.

          • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

            Orchi==what I notice is you treat the feral pig the guy DID run into as if he were on par with you or me, or joe six-pack, or an average american just doing the best he might coming upon a person with an edge of hostility to him.


            Now, put on your OTHER hat and evaluate the actions of this Protect AND SERVE POLICE OFFICER as if he had training and supervision on how to interact with the public.

            Could you post 3 times in a row and tell us about that?

            ((Note–I have responded to my self more than 3 times…..only a few times. Not the worst of sins. Its what you SAID that really sucks, regardless of how you slice it.))

          • pedro says:

            What a humble stance.

        • Mextli says:

          I bet you are “A Man of Science” too.

  4. orchidcup says:

    The video starts with the officer telling the person that he will be disarmed until he is determined not to be a threat.

    Yes, the police officer can disarm someone until he determines the gun is legal.

    The time to confront the behavior of the police is in court, not while the police are responding to a call.

    He was resisting the police and being belligerent.

    I would have felt threatened as a cop until I could determine what was going on.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      You continue to DWELL on what everyone here (except the RightwingNuts who are barely conscious about anything) already knows.

      YES THE COP IS DANGEROUS–so must be treated with kid gloves==but NOT the apologia you offer.

      Not too subtle a point of distinctions.

      Maybe this will draw it out of you: was the cop doing the best job you can imagine a cop doing in the circumstances presented? -or- how would you have handled it?

      I don’t think I’m imagining too much given this is in hindsight that I would notice a Dad with his Kiddie on a hiking trail?…….and find something better to do with my time?

      • orchidcup says:

        The cops were responding to call about somebody carrying a gun.

        They did not swoop down on this poor hapless person without reason.

        The police did not know any facts when they arrived on the scene. They did not know the gun is legal. They did not know the kid is hiking with his father.

        They cannot reasonably assume they know anything until they take the necessary steps to establish the facts.

        Are you people stupid?

        Yes, they may have not handled the situation perfectly, and yes, they may have said something inappropriate, but the time to address those issues is in court, with a complaint, not while the police are responding to a call.

        • Sam says:

          As the self-proclaimed purveyor of common sense, perhaps you can understand the lack of such demonstrated by the gestapo.

  5. Trex says:

    This is a classic GunNutJob. Clearly mentally unstable. These are the scary f*@ks that make us all afraid by a society armed to the teeth.

    If I saw him walking around my neighborhood, I’d report him too.

  6. tooold says:

    Cup read the declaration of independence followed by the bill of rights followed by the constitution. Then see if the position you are taking is still logical.

  7. tooold says:

    Trex read the same I said for cup to read. He is a Sargent major in the military all military read these treaties because they swear an oath to uphold them and they expect the same to be done by any other “official”. The word “gun nut” are inventions of the media you consume. And bear no weight in the reality of the place you reside. This logic you stand on is the same logic the people of Germany took with the reign of Hitler. And hittler fully understood to control the state you must control the minds of the people.

    • Trex says:


      1) The cops initially just wanted to see why he was carrying an assault rifle and if it’s legal. The rifleman escalted the incident.

      2) You always have to follow instructions from the police, even if you think they are legally wrong. Otherwise you are subject to arrest. Period.

      3) If this rifleman was in your living room with your family present. And he is acting like THAT (mad, excited, distrubed)! Would you hand the rifle back to him? If you would you are nuttier than you look.

      4) What does being a military man have to do with this incident? Hint: Nothing.

      • orchidcup says:

        1) The cops initially just wanted to see why he was carrying an assault rifle and if it’s legal. The rifleman escalted the incident.

        Correct. They were also responding to a call. They did not swoop down on him and decide to harass him for no reason.

        2) You always have to follow instructions from the police, even if you think they are legally wrong. Otherwise you are subject to arrest. Period.

        Correct, in most cases. It is best to follow directions from law enforcement even if you think they are wrong about the law. The time to settle a dispute about the law is in court. Most people do not know the law and assume they do.

        I cannot reasonably expect to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights by walking down my street with my shotgun strapped to my chest and act surprised because my neighbors called the police wondering why I am walking around with a shotgun.

  8. MikeN says:

    American citizens are presumed to be acting illegally unless otherwise demonstrated.

  9. What ever happened to ‘innocent before proven guilty”
    After all its not as if we are in Mexico with “fast and furious”
    Perhaps we got the gun in a cracker jack box or online on Craiglist

  10. Matt says:

    Im guessing a lot of you folks don’t live in open carry states or counties, as long as I’m not threatening anyone in my county I could carry an AR-15 into the grocery store, the store can kick me out, but it’s not against the law, and law enforcement doesn’t have any reason to stop and interrogate me, in fact in my county you can see people armed to the teeth, no one cares unless they get threatening. The cop is lucky the trained Vet didn’t kill him when he tried to grab his gun without asking, a simple reflex action and the cop would be dead, you NEVER grab a gun unless it’s a life or death issue, it’s as stupid as pointing a gun at someone.

    • spsffan says:

      Well, agreed. The cop was extremely stupid. But, so was the citizen. It clearly was NOT a regular “open carry in an area where it is common” kind of situation.

      Of course it wasn’t an “open carry in Times Square” situation either.

      Both cop and citizen are good candidates for some medication from what I can see.

      • Matt says:

        Open carry on a hiking trip in the backwoods of Texas, where there are feral pigs that will rush people in some situations. Is not a regular open carry in an area where it is common? I guess you don’t know Texas.

        • orchidcup says:

          Feral hogs are talented at avoiding humans. Their behavior is proof that they are intelligent.

          Feral hogs will only rush a human when they feel cornered or trapped. This is a highly unlikely scenario when somebody is simply out for a hike.

          Feral hog hunters will tell you that hogs are always on the move and difficult to find and kill.

          The idea that someone feels threatened by the wildlife around Temple Texas is hilarious.

          They obviously don’t know Texas.

  11. Ken says:

    Seems the real danger in Temple is from the becostumed, state-paid wild pigs. Given that they tend to run in very large gangs, it’s best just to do what they tell you to do.

  12. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    This thread actually demonstrates a valuable and serious “issue” when considering societal questions: Questions in a Vacuum, then real world applications?

    The gun controversy fits well into the layering of issues. I think too many “gun nuts” or gun advocates do so in a vacuum. They only think about guns through their OWN experience AND all too often with an assumption that everyone else will be acting within the law, or reasonably, or as they would do?

    then you have the real world experience. A veteran with his own PTSD issues out in public with a gun and wanting to be a Champion of his Constitutional Rights.

    forms quite a pig sty since all cops are not constitutional guardians and have their own psychological issues.

    So–yeah, first consideration is your own emotions/history/druthers—but can you move your thinking along to the rest of society you actually live in? And there in lies the rub===getting your best thinking from OUTSIDE yourself. Only way to do that is with studies, statistics, reports, etc.

    things change with density too. What works in the wilderness does not work in the city. Rules won’t work in the city if too many exceptions are made for the wilderness: everything IS connected.

    flowers -not- weeds.

  13. Cp says:

    The individual in this video is wrong, the concealed handgun laws clearly state that a peace officer can disarm a permit holder. I also recall being told during the class that if you are armed, you are required to present your drivers license and concealed carry permit immediately when approached by a law enforcement officer if you are armed, which he did not do until asked.