The Temple officers approached and questioned Grisham because they received calls, he and his son were bound to attract attention walking along puplic roads armed as they were. Grisham was not in fear of cougars and hogs and coyotes as he said, he carried the AR becuase he wanted to, it is legal and he wanted to prove a point. All of that is fine. But he also handled the situation poorly. His very first response when the officer asked about his weapon set the tone for the entire encounter. The officer asks "what are you doing with that firearm" and Grisham answers "what does it matter". Most law enforcement officers are going to be a little unnerved by a guy walking down the road with a AR in a tactical sling. Law enforcement disarming Grisham during this encounter is no different from LEOs disarming citizens who are legally carrying during traffic stops or pretty much during any encounter. We might not think its right or necessary but courts everywhere have upheld the practice. I am a 25 year Army vet and have was involved in every conflict from Panama up until I retired in 2011. I find Grisham's actions embassasing and more inappropriate than those of the police officers involved.
