I admire most of what I find in National Review. There aren’t that many good conservative publications in America which is swamped with Leftist newspapers and magazines that only pretend to be impartial.
But National Review is just as capable of screwing up. And such is NR’s championing of a belligerent veteran who lives near Temple, which is just up the road from the rancho: “Texas Soldier Arrested for Rudely Displaying Weapon.”
Seems to me the self-described soldier is the rude one, smarting off to a cop who questioned his presumed right to carry a loaded AR-15 on a hike with his young son out in the countryside. He reportedly told NR: “I was legally exercising a right, especially in Texas where we have a right to carry weapons openly….”
That is not true and it’s really lazy journalism to publish it unquestioned and base much of a story on it. NR ought to know better than to publish any assertion of law without a simple Google verification.
Open carry is not legal in Texas, except when hunting or in a sporting event or on your own property. And arguing with a cop (legally called a “peace officer” in Texas) is pretty stupid behavior anywhere at any time no matter how dumb or venal the officer seems to be. It sets a really bad example for a child.
Via Instapundit.
THE TEXAS SCRIBBLER 
The story seemed great, but I’ll have to agree with you. I expect both sides could have done better, but the fact of the matter is that the MSG was walking along a public road. I suspect that if he had it at sling arms instead of at the ready, it might have mitigated the situation in the first place.
But true — carry laws in general typically refer to handguns.
Maybe it would have but I think he’s got an attitude problem. I wonder where he’s from. I doubt he’s a native who not only would have known the gun law but would have been more likely to treat the cop respectfully, whether he deserved it or not.
It’s interesting that the officer did not protest the videotaping. Most of them in most places do these days.
As for the law, if the veteran had been wearing a handgun in plain sight on a public road he’d also have been stopped and told to cover it up. If he had a license to carry concealed, that is. If not, then it’s off to the pokey with him. There is no license to open carry that I ever heard of, just the exceptions noted in the post.
There are characters nowadays who insist they have a right to open carry under the 2nd, but that’s just their opinion. Even back in the late 19th century, Texas peace officers insisted that loaded firearms not be carried or worn in plain sight in their towns. That was only ever tolerated in the movies.
What usually happens when a public debate’s tones are going too high up. People start losing sense of proportion on both sides.
Aided and abetted by sloppy journalism.