Benbrook PD Called for Gun Tshirt in Park

[rtschl]

Saw this in my nextdoor.com feed for a nearby neighborhood. I've linked an article that is public:

One of the neighbors in nextdoor.com said they spoke with the woman who called the police on a man who was at the park with his kids on March 30th. He was wearing a pro gun Tshirt and open carrying. Per comments by other people both on nextdoor.com and the below article that were there, she was not upset about his Tshirt (see image below) but rather that he was open carrying. She told the police that he was making several parents uncomfortable.

According Benbrook Police Department (BPD) Corporal J. Reese, a woman contacted the department at approximately 3:21 p.m., and reported a “suspicious person” with a “gun holstered to his chest,” was wearing a shirt that read “You control your kids, I’ll control my guns.”
Cpl. Reese arrived at the scene, where he made contact with the woman.
She claimed that Johnston “was making other parents on the playground very uncomfortable with his t-shirt,” the corporal wrote in his report of the incident. “The subject did not act threatening to anyone, nor did he threaten anyone.”


Four things made me happy about all this:
* Several supportive parents in the park who let the Dad know what she was doing and that she called the police
* Many neighbors on nextdoor.com who were critical of the woman who called the police and supportive of the Dad
* The Dad and how he handled the situation
* Benbrook PD appears to have handled this well - wish they would/could have written her a ticket for false 911 call

https://www.themaven.net/bluelivesmatte ... QQ/?full=1

[sailor2000]

Please, let us stop the in your face tactics. Own your rights, use your rights, but please stop engaging in actions designed to trigger a response in those not on our side. They cannot help who they are and this kind of behavior only increases the power of the forces against us. Please.

[Grundy1133]

would that be an assault shirt?

[rotor]

Glad he wasn't arrested for "disorderly conduct". Wonder if there is any remedy against the woman calling the complaint?

sailor, this is in your face tactics? What if he had on an NRA shirt?

[Grundy1133]

Glad he wasn't arrested for "disorderly conduct". Wonder if there is any remedy against the woman calling the complaint?

sailor, this is in your face tactics? What if he had on an NRA shirt?

I thought he meant the woman calling the cops was using in your face tactics... him wearing a shirt with a gun on it ISN'T in your face tactics... if the shirt said "I love guns and if you don't you're stupid and you are the scourge of the planet" then i could see that as 'in your face' tactics to trigger a response... that's like someone calling the cops becuase you're wearing a heavy metal shirt that says "i'll keep my heavy metal and you keep your pansy music" it doesnt warrant a call to the cops... and if the woman used 911 instead of the number for the local PD, she should be charged with a false 911 call because this wasn't an emergency. nobody's life was in danger.

[AJSully421]

You have no right to “feel comfortable” anywhere. You have no special ability to “feel safe” or any other such touchy-feely nonsense. I know the park and have met the officer involved as well. This was well handled by everyone but the loudmouth busy body.

[rtschl]

Please, let us stop the in your face tactics. Own your rights, use your rights, but please stop engaging in actions designed to trigger a response in those not on our side. They cannot help who they are and this kind of behavior only increases the power of the forces against us. Please.

By all accounts public (linked article) and private in nextdoor.com comments by people that were actually there, he was not doing anything that would be considered "in your face tactics". He was there with his kids playing in the public park. He was wearing the Tshirt and OC of his handgun that was holstered. Pretty normal activity for parents with their kids in the park.

I'm no fan of "in your face tactics" for 2A rights or just about anything else for that matter. But the woman appears to be the one who was trying to stir things up with other parents and the police. By all accounts of people that spoke with her she was upset that he had a gun. But she told the police that a lot of parents were uncomfortable with the Tshirt.

So my take is she knew he was legally carrying and doing nothing wrong, but because she is anti-gun she called the police. To me this is just another form of trying to "SWAT" someone.

[Grundy1133]

Please, let us stop the in your face tactics. Own your rights, use your rights, but please stop engaging in actions designed to trigger a response in those not on our side. They cannot help who they are and this kind of behavior only increases the power of the forces against us. Please.

By all accounts public (linked article) and private in nextdoor.com comments by people that were actually there, he was not doing anything that would be considered "in your face tactics". He was there with his kids playing in the public park. He was wearing the Tshirt and OC of his handgun that was holstered. Pretty normal activity for parents with their kids in the park.

I'm no fan of "in your face tactics" for 2A rights or just about anything else for that matter. But the woman appears to be the one who was trying to stir things up with other parents and the police. By all accounts of people that spoke with her she was upset that he had a gun. But she told the police that a lot of parents were uncomfortable with the Tshirt.

So my take is she knew he was legally carrying and doing nothing wrong, but because she is anti-gun she called the police. To me this is just another form of trying to "SWAT" someone.

my thoughts exactly... if everyone around is like "we have no problem with his shirt" but the woman says otherwise, I think it's just the woman who needs to mind her own business...

[RPBrown]

"Johnston said that, as he spoke with police, the woman looked on from 25 or 30 feet away.

He said she began cautioning everyone who walked near her to avoid the park, because “there’s a man with a gun.”

“She was highly ticked off,” Johnston said."

Couldn't this be a charge for trying to (a) cause alarm or (b) incite a riot?
At the very least she should have been cited for a false report. With all of the media attention over OC, I doubt that she didn't know it was legal. What if he had been LEO either off duty or a detective at lunch with his kids?

[Interblog]

Quote the linked story: “I figured I might get some comments or looks,” Johnston said.

If Johnston didn't want to go to Chicago, then why did he get on that train? He fully knew that he was getting on the train - he said so himself!

Johnston wearing that shirt is analogous to the young woman with the perky little bottom wearing the short skirt discussed in a thread gone by. In that other thread, most of this forum's commenters acknowledged that, if the woman wears the skirt, then she has to accept the consequences that it brings her. We have to conclude that the very same principle of responsibility applies for a male wearing a provocative piece of clothing as it does for a female, or else we run the risk of endorsing a blatant double standard.

In other words, I see Sailor's point on this one. Yes, Johnston had every right to do what he did. He had every right to bait that woman just as young women have every right to bait men by wiggling their short-skirted bottoms in front of them. But Johnston is engaging in a form of showboating. That, to me, does not embody the humility and the respectful presence that should be projected by gun owners. Johnston erodes the image of gun owners just as Ms. Short Skirt erodes the image of us women.

[SQLGeek]

If she was so scared, why did she stay in the park with her kids?

[lildave40]

One day at the mall I got screamed at that I was a baby killer and a racist just for wearing my proud army dad shirt.

[anygunanywhere]

Deleted

[Tex1961]

Quote the linked story: “I figured I might get some comments or looks,” Johnston said.

If Johnston didn't want to go to Chicago, then why did he get on that train? He fully knew that he was getting on the train - he said so himself!

Johnston wearing that shirt is analogous to the young woman with the perky little bottom wearing the short skirt discussed in a thread gone by. In that other thread, most of this forum's commenters acknowledged that, if the woman wears the skirt, then she has to accept the consequences that it brings her. We have to conclude that the very same principle of responsibility applies for a male wearing a provocative piece of clothing as it does for a female, or else we run the risk of endorsing a blatant double standard.

In other words, I see Sailor's point on this one. Yes, Johnston had every right to do what he did. He had every right to bait that woman just as young women have every right to bait men by wiggling their short-skirted bottoms in front of them. But Johnston is engaging in a form of showboating. That, to me, does not embody the humility and the respectful presence that should be projected by gun owners. Johnston erodes the image of gun owners just as Ms. Short Skirt erodes the image of us women.

[ScottDLS]

Well just as long as he didn't have a MAGA ball cap. It's like the women that dress provocatively. It's their fault if they get assaulted, just like this guy open carrying in the park. We shouldn't even have open carry it's just another reason why CJ Grisham will get our 2nd amendment permission slips taken away. I for one like to wear my LTC on a lanyard around my neck when concealed carrying, and I generally leave when there are children present. We need to be the good guys who care about people's feelings or the Legislature will get annoyed at us and punish us. As long as I can take my over and under 20ga to the skeet range (broken down, in the trunk, and separate from the ammo of course). And when my .22 revolver isn't at the range, it's locked up in my gun safe with the ammo in a different safe and a trigger lock.