NY man arrested for using rifle to defend family from gang
George Grier — a family man whose home in Uniondale, on Long Island just east of New York City, was threatened last weekend by two dozen gang members – thought he as doing the right thing protecting his family by confronting the gang bangers with a rifle he lawfully kept in his home. Instead, he found out that in Nassau County, home to an estimated 2,000 members of the ultra-violent “MS-13″ gang, brandishing a firearm, even in defense of one’s home and family, is a criminal offense. He was arrested and charged with felony reckless endangerment.
What landed Grier in legal hot water was not that he fired the rifle (a semi-automatic AK-47) at any of the gang members gathered on his lawn who were taunting him with threats to kill him, his wife and his children; but that he fired a few warning shots into his lawn in an obvious attempt to scare the thugs away, not to kill or even wound anyone.
As explained by Nassau County’s finest – who were alerted to the incident by sound detectors in the neighborhood that apparently can pinpoint the sound of gunshots and alert the police — because Grier admitted he did not see any of the gang members draw a weapon on him, his use of a rifle to try and scare them away was excessive and unlawful.
We can hope that if the local prosecutor persists in pursuing these trumped-up charges against Grier, a jury will acquit him. However, in New York, where New York City’s mayor proudly upholds that city’s draconian gun control law that disarms virtually all law-abiding citizens, such result is by no means assured.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
85 comments Add your comment
g
September 11th, 2010
1:19 am
Hopefully a decent judge will throw the case out.
SPQR(laissez faire)
September 11th, 2010
1:52 am
Bryan, not all live has the same value, and much human life has no value..
Inner city gang bangers fall into the no value class..it doesnt mean hunt them down and kill them for kicks, but if threatened by them, killing them is no loss.
SPQR(laissez faire)
September 11th, 2010
1:55 am
according to witnesses, The gang members said ‘your dead, your family is dead”..thats a violent death threat..maybe they are muslim gang bangers..either way, its enough evidence that were I on the jury, I’d have to excuse up to 22(supposed number of gang trash) cases of justifiable innercitytrashicide
SPQR(laissez faire)
September 11th, 2010
1:59 am
Just as I refused to convict, when I was on a Jury for a tax evasion case, because I judged the law to be invalid so the prosecution of the law was moot, I would similary urge juries in clear cut self defense cases to use jury nullification if the law is not on the side of common sense right..legality and right rarely are the same thing in modern leftist dominated judicary and congress of the USA
budman
September 11th, 2010
3:00 am
Darn not another citizen trying to defend himself/family….Man can you write SPQR!!!!
Larry G
September 11th, 2010
6:56 am
“But the danger to the community was obvious: the lunatic who fired an assault rifle in a neighborhood. If I catch anyone doing that near me, I would make a citizen’s arrest and see that clown in prison where he belongs.”
This is very indicative of the thought process (or lack thereof) of many of our brainwashed sheep we call neighbors in this country. Let’s ignore the fact that the weapon was legally owned by a law abiding citizen who was abiding by his 2nd Amendment rights to self defense and that of his family in the face of overwhelming aggression and threat of murder, and concentrate on the catch phrase description of “assault rifle”. Mindless, spineless and ignorant people who make comments like the above are the same people who would be praying for their armed neighbor to come to their rescue if they were the target in a similar situation. Of course, they’d probably be bound weeping on their knees while they watched their wives being raped and children butchered by these murderous thugs.
“Citizen’s arrest” indeed!!! You, sir, are free to give up the right of self preservation and defense of your family while whining about others who choose to protect theirs. Others are still free to protect ourselves and our loved ones against those who would attempt to steal our freedom and our lives. God forbid the day when Americans are forced to lie on our backs unarmed, weak and vulnerable because of ignorance like yours!
reindawg
September 11th, 2010
7:07 am
Gun and assault rifle two different things? Please define “assault rifle” or do you just use the warped definition the media and senseless members of congress use “it looks like one so it must be one”. A semi-automatic weapon simply means one pull of the trigger….one round fired and the next round is fed and ready to fire. Not much different from someone who can quickly work a bolt or lever action firearm and many modern hunting rifles are in fact semi-automatic “assault rifles” that originated in military use. There are in fact very few people walking around either legally or illegally with guns that would be regulated under the NFA (tommy guns, other full auto) and this has been the case for nearly 70 years.
chuck
September 11th, 2010
7:53 am
The problem with stories like this are people that are completely inexperienced with firearms read “semi automatic AK-47″ and immediately start thinging “machine gun”. This post is aimed for the liberal crowd that has never had the opportunity to get outside, away from their laptops and blackberries, and enjoy the shooting sports or hunting. Let me preach on! All “semi automatic” means is that a cartridge is fired when the trigger is pulled…..exactly the same way as a standard Remington deer rifle that ole grampa used to use to put meat on the table!!! The difference is the capacity of cartridges in the magazine (thats the thingy that holds the “bullets”) Nothing was said that this rifle had some kind of monster magazine attached to it or that he fired some abnormal amout of shots. The troubling part of this story is that there are still people that choose to live in parts of the country that have these type laws i.e. “Blue States” Thank God I live in rural Ga. where I can shoot thugs or the ground in front of them and never worry about being locked up!!!! Yall have a good day now
Old man Robert Cox
September 11th, 2010
8:35 am
..OOKIJNM
budman
September 11th, 2010
10:08 am
This blog reminds me of basic training!!!! All the Southern boys were one side of the barracks talking about deer hunting and what firearms they own. The Yankees were on the other side asking us what it was like to fire a firearm. These guys have never seen a gun, held a gun, or even fired one! I have been a gun owner since I was 9 yrs old. Oh Yes! citizen arrest that is a good way to get shot!!! grave yard dead..as we say in Charleston. Bye the way my father taught me to shoot…It saved my ass in Vietnam.
nelson
September 11th, 2010
11:14 am
Sooooooooooo you think this guy should be firing a AK-47 at or over some thugs standing on his lawn? The AK-47 [assault rifle] has a cartrige holding 30 bullets, has an effective sighting range of 400 meters and fires 600 rounds per minute. All this for a few noisy bums standing on his lawn.
Even my hero “Dirty Harry” only needed a magnum 347. Although last night I saw him using a whale spear to impale a guy. What is next, a bazooka, “Dirty Harry” used one of those. I will grant you, crime is over the top, murder, armed robbery, lets face it, this is not worth haing a world wide uprising over
jennifer
September 11th, 2010
2:12 pm
he was doing the right thing.plus he had the rite to deffende his family.its amazing that the gang didnt shot back. the law in very unfair.i wonder what happen to the bangers?
Whimpy
September 11th, 2010
3:42 pm
Shoot to kill is my motto.Can’t stand thugs on drugs.
Palin fan
September 11th, 2010
4:11 pm
I hope he moves here to shoot some of those filthy gang members in south Fulton.
Hillbilly Deluxe
September 11th, 2010
5:37 pm
The idea of somebody performing a citizen’s arrest on someone who is holding an assault rifle, is a tad far-fetched.
Tango
September 11th, 2010
7:33 pm
People here argue right and wrong as opposed to what is legal or illegal, as if they were the same. Twenty people, appearing to be gang members, congregated on Mr. Grier’s property and refused to leave when asked. Instead, they threatened to kill Mr. Grier and his family.
Faced with belligerent superior numbers, Mr. Grier could show fear and run and hide, only delaying the possibility the antagonists would make good on their threat. Or he could face the bullies down with his rifle and have a much better chance of keeping his family safe, which is thankfully how it ended.
Putting four rounds into his lawn put no one at risk.
Was he right or wrong? I embrace his sense of security and believe he behaved admirably. Someone less cool headed might have opened fire into the crowd.
Were his actions legal? I have my understanding of the law but I’m not a lawyer or a judge. I hope wisdom prevails and all charges are dismissed but it is, after all, NY and sometimes the interpretation of the law there is nearly incomprehensible.
Regardless of the outcome, Mr. Grier will be facing costly legal expenses. I took it upon myself to locate his address and send him a donation towards those expenses. I hope he prevails.
budman
September 11th, 2010
8:59 pm
Bye the way: I would never shot some one in my yard….But ( biggest word in the English dictation ) You come in my house as a break end,you better come in shooting, because I am armed, my wife has her pistol and we have a bad ass dog
budman
September 11th, 2010
10:20 pm
‘Gun control ” use both hands”
barking frog
September 12th, 2010
7:22 am
He should have followed police logic. Lock the doors,
call 911. They would have responded within the hour,
required a land survey to determine if the gang was
trespassing,then issued a warning citation if they
were or a false 911 call citation to him if they were not.
You may keep and bear arms but if you use them
you will go to jail and to trial.
LeeH1
September 12th, 2010
4:13 pm
The man should have told the police he was Moslem and an immigrant. That would be enough of an excuse to murder the whole gang.
Hosea Williams
September 12th, 2010
4:47 pm
We have a right to approach the property and at least knock on the door.I can bring back two hundred protesters with picket signs.
bob
September 12th, 2010
5:18 pm
i live in a state with “LIVE FREE OR DIE” for a state motto but..
a 30 round magazine seems completely reasonable …. when there is 24 enemies
i would have waited on the outside of my door and defended the outside of my house
while wife called 911 from the other side of the locked door
he needs to be let go and his gun handed back in front of his neighbors so the people realize they dont have too be intimidted
Hosea Williams
September 12th, 2010
5:57 pm
bob need to relize my boys have guns and knifes.
bob
September 12th, 2010
7:00 pm
better bring more then couple dozen
me and my neighbors have guns and we have target ranges to get good at shooting
zeus234
September 12th, 2010
11:28 pm
I keep seeing all this “assault rifle”crap and some have explained the fact that it WAS not an assault rifle,it was not full auto, an AK47″ ASSAULT RIFLE” is actually a machine gun,also an assault rifle is select fire, burst,semi-auto.The civilian AK 47 is no more powerful then a 30-30 deer rifle.
And as a lot have expressed they would not have fired any warning shots(ok,consider one of their heads blown off a warning)I
would not either.I’d start dropping their sorry ass’s.
zeus234
September 12th, 2010
11:42 pm
paleo-neo-Carlinist
And you are correct…fire an AK47 ASSAULT rifle is nothing like popping off rounds with a .38 or .45. Have you ever fired the real deal full blown ASSAULT RIFLE?The civilian AK47 yes that’s like popping off rounds with a .38 or.45.
paleo-neo-Carlinist
September 13th, 2010
11:20 am
zeus234 – have fired all three (AK-47, .45 and .38) among others. my point was, civilian/semi-autmatic, or not; a 7.62 round fired from a AK-47 (M-14, or SKS, for that matter) travels a great distance. one has to consider the possibility of “collateral damage” when defending a home (in a residential neighborhood) with such a weapon. don’t get me wrong, better to have an AK-47 than a cell phone to call 9/11, but I suspect there is more to this story than we are hearing.
Chagall Guevarian
September 13th, 2010
1:31 pm
Paleo
“OH, and if the “20 gang bangers” did not “rush” Mr. What’s His Name, he did not (in my opinion) have the need to bust any caps.”
Are you making fun of me because I’m black?
paleo-neo-Carlinist
September 13th, 2010
4:31 pm
I’ve never met you. How could I possibly know you are black? Did you attempt to “make fun” of me (Friday) because I am “wise”?
zeus234
September 13th, 2010
8:56 pm
paleo-An AK47 IS 7.62X39mm ,and about as powerful as a 30-30 an M14 is indeed a 7.62 however 7.62×51mm no comparison in range and power. The R700 is 7.62×51. .308
Chagall Guevarian
September 14th, 2010
8:05 am
racist
Divinity
September 14th, 2010
3:09 pm
EXACTLY why we moved the hell out of Long Island. I miss NY, but to get financially raped via taxes (our property taxes ALONE went up to just under $17,000 a year when we left) and then harassed to death if you believe in your God-given rights to protect yourself or insist on the sanctity or your privacy, is just too incompatible with sanity.
Funny how Bloomberg has resigned himself to “lead the charge” against guns and gun rights, yet he employs armed security and I’d be willing to bet he protects his mansions and property with (GASP) guns. (Oh, the horror.)
Apparently the government believes that since it’s gotten away with murder (literally) in terms of opression and trampling on people’s rights, that they can continue to slam people’s backs against the wall with no fear of revolt. It’s unfortunate that they are hell-bent on forcing a violent revolution. Contrary to their arrogant assumptions, you can only rape, plunder and pillage but so much before people have nothing to lose and decide to fight back…and the odds are NOT stacked in their favor.
You’d think the idiots would read a history book or two and try to avoid repeating the same behavior that has destroyed their ilk again and again in generations gone by but alas, wealth/power and intelligence/rationale are NOT synonymous. Perhaps it’s a genetic anomaly/aberrance that results from inbreeding….just sayin’.
NY man arrested for using rifle to defend family from gang | The Barr Code » SpootyLinks.com
September 14th, 2010
4:50 pm
[...] http://blogs.ajc.com/bob-barr-blog/2010/09/10/ny-man-arrested-for-using-rifle-to-defend-family-from-... Posted by Spooty at 4:50 pm Daily Links [...]
Divinity
September 14th, 2010
5:18 pm
@paleo-neo-Carlinist
You are correct that this incident is up to the Nassau County prosecutors and details need to be sorted out but the details that ARE known about what happened, highlight the problems that occur with the assertion that the words “shall not be infringed” are a matter of interpretation.
People have a right to protect themselves and their property. His property was being tresspassed upon, he was in legal possession of his own firearm and fired the rounds into the ground. Unless evidence turns up that contradicts any of these facts, you’d be hard pressed to say that either act was illegal. Of course that doesn’t mean that he will be exonerated. Firing into the air (or anywhere else for that matter) would have been “reckless” in my opinion, given the density of the suburban population but he didn’t do that. Again, what he DID do will be the subject of debate but that would be the case no matter what type of firearm he used.
Are you familiar with the Uniondale/Hempstead area? Have you ever encountered MS-13 gang members? I can’t say that if they were on my front lawn threatening me or my family, I wouldn’t have done the same. That area is a crap hole that is dominated by gangs and violence. It’s the kind of place where you don’t produce a firearm without proving that you aren’t afraid to pull the trigger. I’m not saying that this should be a “standard” response but perhaps the environment wouldn’t be so bad if law enforcement considered the message that such a response to this situation sends to the criminal element of society.
I would have to challenge your comment: ” this is a tricky case, and calls into question the value of video/audio surveilance of citizens.”
The average person is videotaped approximately 64 times a DAY. Such a statistic is an affront to the core principle of liberty. The consequences of government surveillance of citizens FAR outweigh the justifications of such actions. Give an inch and they WILL take a mile and their very actions have served as proof of that fact.
The first step onto that slippery slope always turns into a complete vertical decline. The citizenry lets them use security cameras and next thing you know, they’re chopping up Posse Comitatus and using virtual strip search, naked body (AND radioactive) scanners. Now they’re employing mobile units to preform virtual strip searches of you and your children. What makes that any different than forcing Jews to walk around naked in Nazi Germany? The only difference here is the overt cloaking of that disgusting violation of your basic human right to modesty, in “technological” goggles. It also proves how sacred the principle of privacy over security is as was expressed by Benjamin Franklin when he said:
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
bong_jamesbong2001
September 21st, 2010
9:26 am
We learned in law school that the thugs have to be in the act of breaking forcefully into your house before you can shoot them.
The wiser thing to have done would have been to call the cops. But the question is thus raised “Do you have time to properly defend yourself when 20 guys are threatening you on your own lawn, under the current rules?” I guess the Nassau County jury will figure it out.
The real problem is the NY gun laws; they are unconstitutional. Period. The US CONSTITUTION gives the militia (the entire male population old enough to bear weapons) the right to keep and bear arms. There are no exemptions in the CONSTITUTION for the defenseless citizens of NY state or even felons. Under the current setup, Geo. Washington would have been denied an;(unconstitutional) gun license; he was a traitor to the British government.
A government which can’t trust the people can’t be trusted for any reason.