Self Defense or Reckless Endagerment?

[IWS]

Long Island Man Arrested For Defending Home With AK-47Says Many Gang Members Were Coming After His Family

September 7, 2010 7:19 PM

UNIONDALE, N.Y. (CBS 2) ? He was arrested for protecting his property and family.

But it?s how the Long Island man did it that police say crossed the line.

He got an AK-47 assault rifle, pulled the trigger and he ended up in jail, reports CBS 2?s Pablo Guzman.

George Grier said he had to use his rifle on Sunday night to stop what he thought was going to be an invasion of his Uniondale home by a gang he thought might have been the vicious ?MS-13.? He said the whole deal happened as he was about to drive his cousin home.

?I went around and went into the house, ran upstairs and told my wife to call the police. I get the gun and I go outside and I come into the doorway and now, by this time, they are in the driveway, back here near the house. I tell them, you know, ?Can you please leave?? Grier said.

Grier said the five men dared him to use the gun; and that their shouts brought another larger group of gang members in front of his house.

?He starts threatening my family, my life. ?Oh you?re dead. I?m gonna kill your family and your babies. You?re dead.? So when he says that, 20 others guys come rushing around the corner. And so I fired four warning shots into the grass,? Grier said.

Grier was later arrested. John Lewis is Grier?s attorney.

?What he?s initially charged with ? A D felony reckless endangerment ? requires a depraved indifference to human life, creating a risk that someone?s going to die. Shooting into a lawn doesn?t create a risk of anybody dying,? Lewis said.

Grier said he knew Nassau County Police employ the hi-tech ?ShotSpotter? technology in his area and that the shooting would bring police in minutes. Cops told Guzman he was very cooperative.

Grier also said he was afraid the gang outside his house was the dreaded MS-13. And Nassau County Police Lt. Andrew Mulraine, head of the gang unit, said MS-13 has 2,000 members in the county.

?They?re probably the most organized. They almost have a military hierarchy within the gang, so they are the most organized gang we encounter on a daily basis,? Mulraine said.

You may think a person has the right to defend their home. But the law says you can only use physical force to deter physical force. Grier said he never saw anyone pull out a gun, so a court would have to decide on firing the gun.

Police determined Grier had the gun legally. He has no criminal record. And so he was not charged for the weapon.

That ShotSpotter technology pinpoints where a gun has been fired within 35 feet. Police said it also detected two other shootings in nearby Roosevelt that night.

http://newyork.cbslo...me-with-ak-47/#

 

[Times]

In the most common use of force matrix for law enforcement, the first level of force is called "Officer Presence". The concept is that the officer just being visible is a threat of possible violence.

So when a person is all alone and outnumbered is that not potentially a deadly situation? He says there were over 20 people there in his yard all showing hostility and we all know that group dynamics of this sort lead to a mob mentality where they all turn into out of control animals once one crosses the line.

So 1 guy facing down 20 or 30 possible gang members? I can where firing a warning shot was not unreasonable, he could just as easily claimed they rushed him and started firing into the crowd that was in his yard and then what? I am not sure of the laws in long island but in Florida your allowed to use deadly force to defend yourself on your own property.

That said, he was pretty stupid to go outside with his gun showing in the first place, call the cops and see if they show up. Establish a record of trying to get help with the situation and when the gang mambers come back, you can have a better possition to defend yourself as to why you had to shoot someone. Remember, the police cannot protect you, they can only show up and play janitor and possibly discover evidence to catch the guys who killed you and your family after the fact. A great deal of gang related killings are not solved though, so you have to decide when dealing with a gang if it is better to move away or stand up to them on your own.

As big as I am on self-defense, I would want to stand up to them, but where my kids are concerned I think I would just pack up and move away from the gang area. Police and private citizens have to follow the rules, gangs don't.

**********************

Oh, the charge "A D felony reckless endangerment ? requires a depraved indifference to human life, creating a risk that someone?s going to die." I don't see that sticking, firing rounds into the ground is not in of itself putting life into danger. There would have to be a more direct assumption that the bullets could hit someone, take shooting into a building or a car for example. There is no reason for the person to believe his shooting rounds into the grass would ever cause possible harm and in fact his actions were intended and designed to warn off possible attackers and preserve life.

The real question is, when confronted by a mob of people who could easily over power you and kill you, is it reasonable to try and get them to back off with discharging a weapon into the ground? It certainly does warn the crowd of people who are advancing on him that the weapon does function and is loaded, this will give ample warning to all there that he is capable of defending himself. Once that point was made any further advance would certainly prove their hostile intent.

But as I said, standing out in the open doing it all was certainly stupid, he was an open target for anyone with even basic shooting skill to take out. He should have stayed inside his house.

For those that believe the police are there to protect you from gang like this, take some time looking into cases like DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services. and Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department

By the way, did anyone else notice that only the home owner trying to protect his family went to jail but the gang tresspassing and threatenging to kill his family were not? Your tax dollars at work, lol.

 

[emkay64]

So far the guy sounds about as bright as a bag of hair. Is he mentally challenged? Anyways..more guns..big shocker. Reckless or not...in the States everyone can have a gun..even the stupid. If they don't like the way he waves it around, change the laws. I also doubt that there were 20 plus people in this random guys yard.

 

[atlantic]

Two things here:

1.) He should have stayed in his house and contacted the police.

2.) He better move away, or there will be retaliation.

 

[Times]

I also doubt that there were 20 plus people in this random guys yard.

I agree he was not completely smart in his actions, but why do you assume is is telling a lie about how many people were in his yard? You assume a gun owner is not capable of telling the truth? The guy may not be the brightest person in the world, but that does not make him dishonest.

What would have made him deserve the benefit of the doubt emkay?

Is laying down and allowing yourself to be a victim somehow considered the only way a person can be honest in your world?

*********************

Your right atlantic, there will most likely be an attack on him later on and will the police be there to stop the attack? This man should leave, and I guess that is the real moral ot this story, your only two options in places like this is let yourself die like a good citizen, or move away.

 

[*Chi*]

I also doubt that there were 20 plus people in this random guys yard.

I agree he was not completely smart in his actions, but why do you assume is is telling a lie about how many people were in his yard? You assume a gun owner is not capable of telling the truth? The guy may not be the brightest person in the world, but that does not make him dishonest.

What would have made him deserve the benefit of the doubt emkay?

Is laying down and allowing yourself to be a victim somehow considered the only way a person can be honest in your world?

*********************

Your right atlantic, there will most likely be an attack on him later on and will the police be there to stop the attack? This man should leave, and I guess that is the real moral ot this story, your only two options in places like this is let yourself die like a good citizen, or move away.

Yeah TJ, that's why he might be exaggerating, cuz he's a gun owner Not to make his story sound better and more justifiable...

 

[Times]

Yeah TJ, that's why he might be exaggerating, cuz he's a gun owner Not to make his story sound better and more justifiable...

Why would he have to?

Is there really a big difference between protecting yourself from 15 gang members? 10 gang members?

Your missing the point, we have a guy who is following the law and is defending his home while intruders are on his lawn and making threats to his family, but he is the guy you two think is possibly dishonest?

Seriously?

Why assume he lied? I will give him the benefit of the doubt until an actual reason is offered to doubt him.

 

[emkay64]

"Is laying down and allowing yourself to be a victim somehow considered the only way a person can be honest in your world?"

Yes TJ...this is exactly what I meant. :wacko:

 

[snafu]

I don't care if it's two people. If you are in fear for your life you should be able to use deadly force. If just shooting the gun and detring violence then he should be aplauded. Having said that he shouldn't have gone outside in the first place.

 

[emkay64]

I don't care if it's two people. If you are in fear for your life you should be able to use deadly force. If just shooting the gun and detring violence then he should be aplauded. Having said that he shouldn't have gone outside in the first place.

Well Snaf...it would appear local law enforcement is taking measures to make sure he doesn't "go out" again B)

 

[snafu]

I don't care if it's two people. If you are in fear for your life you should be able to use deadly force. If just shooting the gun and detring violence then he should be aplauded. Having said that he shouldn't have gone outside in the first place.

Well Snaf...it would appear local law enforcement is taking measures to make sure he doesn't "go out" again B)

Here's some rep for that one. :sweat:

 

[jokersarewild]

...your only two options in places like this is let yourself die like a good citizen, or move away.

No, there are THREE options. Die, leave...OR BECOME THE PUNISHER!

MS-13 is some scary sh*t, though. If I thought, at any point, that they were planning on killing me or were in my yard, I doubt I would back down from that. Going outside was probably a bad ideal, although I do believe the "warning shots" were useful for the two reasons stated in the article:

1. To warn them.

2. To get the cops there more quickly than they probably would be otherwise, because of their gunfire detection system.

If there had been more of a "get the hell out of here or I'll blow your facehole off with my AK-47" from, say, a window on the top floor, then maybe a warning shot, it might've been a little bit smarter. But as it stands, I'd rather make my stand in the house. I know all of the hiding places, where the rooms are, etc. They only have so many doors they can enter through anyway, just barricade them and when they try to push through, then go "oh hey, I have a gun. Get the hell off of my property. Cops are on their way." Seems like a better plan, methinks.

 

[jokersarewild]

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/penal/PEN035.15_35.15.html

New York Penal Code 35.15 says that " 2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person

under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:

(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or

about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the

actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with

complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the

necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no

duty to retreat if he or she is:

(i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor; or

(ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police

officer or a peace officer at the latter's direction, acting pursuant to

section 35.30; or

( B) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing

or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal

sexual act or robbery; or

© He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing

or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that

the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of

section 35.20."

Subdivision 3 of section 35.20:

" 3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to

be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that

another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such

dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other

person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to

prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such

burglary.

"

With that many people there (even if it was less) encroaching on his property, it was reasonable to assume they were going to burglarize his house, and possibly injure him or his family.

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/penal/PEN0140.10_140.10.html

Penal Code 140 defines what Third Degree burglary is. Basically, if he has a fence, and they go inside of it, he has every right to use deadly force to protect his property. If not, it's a little shadier, since he stepped outside, but I would guess that since he felt his family, and he himself, were threatened, he was allowed to do what he did, since it wasn't violent, and wasn't a use of deadly force. But hey, I'm not a lawyer

Also, the law doesn't cover reckless endagerment, which I believe is defined as "The state of being endagered; having a small blade lodged in your body."

 

[RaE]

Self Defense... But he needs to move and change his name... pronto.

 

[jokersarewild]

Yes. Assuming it was MS-13. If it wasn't, and they aren't allied with MS-13 in any way, then the name change isn't necessary.

 

[Times]

"Is laying down and allowing yourself to be a victim somehow considered the only way a person can be honest in your world?"

Yes TJ...this is exactly what I meant. :wacko:

Then why did you add in that last part saying you believed he lied emkay?

I agree with the first part of your comment where he does not seem to bright, but then you turned to attacking the idea of guns in America and then ended with your assumption he was telling lies so why was that emkay, you tell me?

 

[emkay64]

"Is laying down and allowing yourself to be a victim somehow considered the only way a person can be honest in your world?"

Yes TJ...this is exactly what I meant. :wacko:

Then why did you add in that last part saying you believed he lied emkay?

I agree with the first part of your comment where he does not seem to bright, but then you turned to attacking the idea of guns in America and then ended with your assumption he was telling lies so why was that emkay, you tell me?

TJ...I would rather masturbate with a cheese grater than get into another debate or discussion with you.

 

[Times]

"Is laying down and allowing yourself to be a victim somehow considered the only way a person can be honest in your world?"

Yes TJ...this is exactly what I meant. :wacko:

Then why did you add in that last part saying you believed he lied emkay?

I agree with the first part of your comment where he does not seem to bright, but then you turned to attacking the idea of guns in America and then ended with your assumption he was telling lies so why was that emkay, you tell me?

TJ...I would rather masturbate with a cheese grater than get into another debate or discussion with you.

Certainly interesting imagery but at the end of the day you still felt compelled to call this man a liar, why was that emkay, what about this man made you believe he was dishonest?

 

[*Chi*]

Then why did you add in that last part saying you believed he lied emkay?

I agree with the first part of your comment where he does not seem to bright, but then you turned to attacking the idea of guns in America and then ended with your assumption he was telling lies so why was that emkay, you tell me?

TJ...I would rather masturbate with a cheese grater than get into another debate or discussion with you.

Certainly interesting imagery but at the end of the day you still felt compelled to call this man a liar, why was that emkay, what about this man made you believe he was dishonest?

Are you slow? Stop accosting her. She already made it clear she is not about to waste her time arguing with crazy people who think they are always right and always have others figured out when they are totally WRONG!

 

[Times]

Are you slow? Stop accosting her. She already made it clear she is not about to waste her time arguing with crazy people who think they are always right and always have others figured out when they are totally WRONG!

Accosting her?

She decided to make a claim of lies about another person based on what Chi?

Emkay decided to show her azz and make a nasty assumption about a complete stranger on a public forum Chi. If she keeps her assumption of lies from this man to herself then fine, nobody can comment, but if she shares her insane accusation against this man on this public forum then she invites comment.

You both have your closed society forum where you can post whatever you want without anyone objecting to it at the jungle, if anyone does object you can simply have them removed so you can both go there if you desire the ability to post without other people responding to what you say.

But you all know by now that I respond to posts on this forum and just the act of submitting your comments means you invite me to be a part of it. It is actually pretty silly to complain that I did reply to be honest.