Interesting

[bilgerat57]

Just some points to consider. I notice at the beginning of the video the officer is telling them that once he has determined there are no issues they will be free to go on their way. Also I noticed that the AR is carried by a single-point sling which allows quick access to deploy the weapon. If I were approaching someone armed in this fashion, I would be apprehensive at best. I was astonished that the officer allowed a second individual to not only approach, but to interact with the subject being controlled. Not a good idea in my opinion. Any LEO's have a comment on that?
I understand that it is illegal to hunt or shoot from a public roadway in Texas (I don't know of anyplace it IS legal for that matter). I can see where the officer would want to check to see if the weapon had been fired recently, or if there was a round in the chamber, if so was the safety engaged? In short was the weapon being carried in a safe and competent fashion?
Don't get me wrong here. I'm not supporting either side. Both sides could have handled this much, much better.
If the weapon had been anything other than an AR, I doubt if there would have been an issue. If there had been no magazine inserted, I doubt there would have been an issue. If the weapon had been carried in a traditional style sling (muzzle up or down or across the back), I doubt there would have been an issue.
I get the feeling that the PD is sending a bit of a message here....."If you want to be difficult, we can be difficult also."
As it stands, only the lawyers and media will win. The taxpayers will have to spend money and resources that could be better used elswhere. The press will have a ball bouncing back and forth between the "rabid gestapo type police" and the "irresponsible gun nut who endangered his child" type stories. I'm interested in hearing others opinions about this mess. Flamers need not bother.

[Slipknot]

Just some points to consider. I notice at the beginning of the video the officer is telling them that once he has determined there are no issues they will be free to go on their way. Also I noticed that the AR is carried by a single-point sling which allows quick access to deploy the weapon. If I were approaching someone armed in this fashion, I would be apprehensive at best. I was astonished that the officer allowed a second individual to not only approach, but to interact with the subject being controlled. Not a good idea in my opinion. Any LEO's have a comment on that?

It is hard to watch a second "suspect" when you are trying to arrest his "buddy". It does seem like the LEO was ignoring the second suspect (a.k.a. the kid) If you do that enough times, you wont make it to retirement.

I understand that it is illegal to hunt or shoot from a public roadway in Texas (I don't know of anyplace it IS legal for that matter). I can see where the officer would want to check to see if the weapon had been fired recently, or if there was a round in the chamber, if so was the safety engaged? In short was the weapon being carried in a safe and competent fashion?

It is legal to OC a rifle in Texas period. None of that other stuff matters. Using that argument a LEO could stop anybody at anytime to "check" for anything.

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not supporting either side. Both sides could have handled this much, much better.
If the weapon had been anything other than an AR, I doubt if there would have been an issue. If there had been no magazine inserted, I doubt there would have been an issue. If the weapon had been carried in a traditional style sling (muzzle up or down or across the back), I doubt there would have been an issue.
I get the feeling that the PD is sending a bit of a message here....."If you want to be difficult, we can be difficult also."
As it stands, only the lawyers and media will win. The taxpayers will have to spend money and resources that could be better used elswhere. The press will have a ball bouncing back and forth between the "rabid gestapo type police" and the "irresponsible gun nut who endangered his child" type stories. I'm interested in hearing others opinions about this mess. Flamers need not bother.

I think you are right about the message the PD is trying to send. That kind of stuff usually works in a small town. The reality is however that Temple is not a small town anymore and those "small town tactics" are going to cost them big money in the civil trial IMO.

[kd5yig]

Also I noticed that the AR is carried by a single-point sling which allows quick access to deploy the weapon. If I were approaching someone armed in this fashion, I would be apprehensive at best.:

Just as a point, because I have seen several indications in the thread that they felt it was slung, if you watch the video carefully, there is no sling on the rifle. Instead, the chest strap on the backpack, a strap common to most framed packs designed to carry heavy loads, is fed through the ARs carry handle before it was clipped. In my opinion, this is not a safe way to stow a rifle, and a proper sling would have been a much better choice.

For full disclosure before I go into my opinion, I was raised by a man who worked his way up through the ranks from Patrolman to Captain. Had it of been me in this situation, I have a funny feeling I would have been on my way in less than 10 minutes. The biggest part of the problem I have with assigning ultimate blame is I feel there is plenty of blame to be spread in this video. We also have a large portion of the video that is unavailable to us because it was edited down, and starts well after the encounter started. In this situation, we can state our opinions of how the encounter went, but ultimately it is going to take a judge and jury to determine if there were any laws broken. However I do thank all involved in this discussion for the 12 pages of entertaining reading.

[Blindref757]

Temple PD just released the Dashcam video of the incident. Looks like the officer is very guilty of violating civil rights in my opinion.
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[baldeagle]

My question would be why did the officer put his hands on the rifle? What was he trying to accomplish? And why did he draw his weapon? It seems to me that the encounter was not handled well at all. He could have simply questioned CJ and, determining that he wasn't breaking any laws, let him go. Instead he's created a huge brouhaha in a state that doesn't take kindly to messin' with people's rights.

[carlson1]

Another Officer who needs to be unemployed.

[Blindref757]

I can't believe that the Chief of Police didn't immediately drop the misdemeanor charge of obstruction when he saw this video the next day. The officer clearly was not threatened, the officer initiated the illegal seizure of the weapon, and the officer was never in a situation where his safety was in question. What little obstruction I saw (if you really stretch the definition of obstruction), was clearly within the bounds of his constitutional rights.

[carlson1]

As of right now I am not able to see the video anymore. Someone will probably be fired over posting the video, but this officer and sergeant continue on with their patrol shifts.

I am glad I at least seen it one time.

[Blindref757]

The video is still under a gag order, even though it was showed in open court. The OCT people took it down to avoid being held in contempt. It will return soon, but not until all of the legal wrangling is wrapped up.

[dihappy]

Mistrial - Hung Jury

Supposedly there was an officers wife on the jury and judge was asked by attorney to excuse himself due to bias but did not.