I have conflicting feelings over this. I know that open carry is a thing in Texas, but who crossed the line, if anyone?

Take it up in the courts, when he refused the order he open Pandora's box. We have courts to settle disputes of this kind but when he refused the order by police then it seems that he was provoking the law to take action, it did and the confrontation went from bad to worse. Poor choice on his part and unfortunate for him. Hope he recovers and learns from his experience. Law enforcement needs to address better ways to diffuse these types of situations.

Governors Abbot has been very clear about protecting the 2nd Amendment in Texas. Contact the State Attornies Office and report it. Sheesh, gangs have more rights in San Antonio than law abiding citizens.

I'm proud to have had the opportunity to meet CJ at a rally in Michigan

Having worked in civil litigation for years (as a non-attorney) in this particular area, my advice to folks finding themselves in an adverse confrontation with police is always the same: Fight it in court and not in the street. Most of the time you are at a great disadvantage in the street and more often than not if you win your suit, you are not walking away with more money if you got hurt. In all 50 states and territories, a police officer must have to be able to articulate reasonable (in the common sense) suspicion that a crime is about to occur, is occurring, or has occurred, in order to detain a person believed to be involved, i.e. give them some sort of order to comply with. If you happen to disagree with your detention or arrest (in the case that probable cause either by observation or in the course of the detention supposedly arises), I advise to comply with all non self-incriminatory demands, (do not admit guilt or knowledge of having committed an offense, do not answer and ask for an attorney when questioned regarding any potential offenses), and instead of focusing on how angry you are or on the dilemmas of the situation, take careful mental notes of everything happening, highlighting behavior or restrictions or actions against you, that you believe are in violation of your rights. It is by far more beneficial to have the most accurate recollection of the events than a blur of profanities or physical violence. Stay courteous but firm regarding your 5th amendment rights. If you are protesting or otherwise exercising your 1st amendment rights, always have a person not directly involved in your action on the sideline video taping the event (if you can get a friendly press person or completely neutral person/ friend to cover your event, even better). In that case, also be sure you do not violate any laws. I advise brushing up on local and state laws and city/county ordinances governing public and private places (such as sidewalks, roads, and parking lots - there are many little perhaps even nonsensical ordinances that often are a misdemeanor offense). In any case, your attorney will be your best weapon in this fight. There are many that solely deal with this type of case. A good attorney will properly filter the legal aspects of the situation and be able discern which perceived rights violations are real and which are not (this is why you should do your best to commit as much detail of your confrontation to memory as possible). There are entire organizations dedicated to protecting people in confrontations with government authority (ACLU for eg. they also have a myriad of good advice for such confrontations). Your veracity in testimony will be by far less scrutinized by the trier of facts (the court) if your behavior during the arrest was exemplary. In this type of situation always consider yourself in court beginning with the first order given to you by a police officer (this is why you need to stay calm, cool, and collected, no matter how offensive it may be to you). Largely our courts still work. If not for you, there are court of appeals. I don't believe anything that any side posts publicly, as it is almost always a distortion of the facts in order to attempt to influence the outcome of the ongoing or future litigation. Read actual court transcripts when they are public, to see what really happened. In this case, it would have been by far more becoming to comply with the orders as given (no matter how much they appeared to be a blatant violation of rights), and then seeing this out in court.To me it appears (just from the info I have) that both sides here could have acted more appropriately.

I saw the video, where Grisham went wrong was that when the deputy was taking the gun off him, he grabbed the rifle by instinct. The officer responded as any officer would do. It is my opinion that since Texas is an open carry state, every gun nut will carry openly even if they themselves legally cannot carry. If the officer was responding to calls, he is obligated to assess whether the person carrying is not a felon or in the commission of a crime. I know lots of snowflakes snitch and they love this kind of stuff but, if there was no complaint then i wonder why the officer stopped him to begin with.

It's important to remember and understand that there are locales in TX, and in most states where laws and rights are not enforced and protected. Cities / counties / states have been taken over by leftwing anti-Americans

wrong on so many levels of following the law which the chief did not do

The police chief needs to be arrested for abuse of power and false arrest.

Who was out of line? Damn, goes without saying. The ones who broke the law, Chief Valenciano and crew.

But, what the hell guys, with a national example of law breaking and corruption, is it any surprise that a police chief comes to believe he is a law onto himself?

My geezerly take on this is that the police chief broke a few of the laws he swore to enforce, and that Mr. Grisham was politically motivated rather than patriotically motivated. Both of them screwed up, driven by their egos.