CJ Grisham mentioned in commentary about what’s wrong with our Armed Forces…

An interesting and worth while read…(http://www.michaelyon-online.com/monkey-business-our-broken-army/All-Pages.htm)

I’d like to say first the article above should NOT be taken as an indictment against open carry or those supporting open carry.  For the record, we firmly believe Texans, all Americans, should have the option to carry openly if they so choose. But the fact is, open carry is not the subject of this article at all.

The article is in fact, commentary on issues of leadership and discipline (or lack thereof) within our Armed Forces. Issues we’ve heard echoed many times among those currently serving and those who left active service in recent years. It happens however, that the article leads off with what can only be described as the ongoing misadventures of one Master Sergeant CJ Grisham, US Army. Apparently Grisham was recently relieved of duty as the Non-commissioned Officer In Charge (NCOIC) of the Army’s Warrior Adventure Quest at Fort Hood.

Grisham has been held out by some as a hero of the 2nd Amendment and Open Carry movement.  And while I know I’ll take heat for this, Grisham’s behavior in the now infamous Temple, TX video didn’t sit any better with me than that of the police officers in said video. I have long wondered if, like those who immediately jumped to holding Trayvon Martin out as a modern martyr of the “Civil Rights Movement” and racial equality, people were jumping to the defense of Grisham with the same sort of blind bias. The article would seem to indicate that this would be “hero” may not be up to the task and is more of an example of a professional victim.

-Gary

8 thoughts on “CJ Grisham mentioned in commentary about what’s wrong with our Armed Forces…

  1. The upshot and pull quote from this article is this, “The real problem, I fear, is that generals are acting more like members of a union or guild protecting each other, rather than as stewards of their profession, enforcing standards for their subordinates and for each other.”

    Generals, it seems, have become part of the “ruling class” like our government officials. They are separate and above those of us in the “country class”, us ordinary citizens. We are becoming more and more like subjects every day, to be ruled, controlled, and provided for by our betters, our overseers.

    20 year veteran retired AF Officer.

  2. Hi Gary,

    I thought you, Jason and Jeff had always argued against open carry vs concealed carry. You have commented before about someone(probably a police officer) walking into some establishment and everyone focusing on his/her pistol. That’s what I do. I always am curious about what they are carrying. Although I don’t have my CHL, I would prefer to conceal as opposed to show what I’ve got. Not sure I want to go back to the Wild, Wild West.

    • Chris,

      I submit that it is a confusing position but, here’s the deal. We either have a right to keep and bear arms or we don’t. So to that end, all three of us support Open Carry as a right. We also recognize it as one of those things where just because you can do something, doesn’t mean it’s always a good idea. There are times and places where open carry is the norm and concealed carry isn’t an option. When that’s the case, we’d rather you be armed openly than not at all. But where the option to do either exists, as you’ve heard us say many times before, we see concealed carry as the way to go.

      -Gary

  3. Greg,

    Your thoughtful post sparked more thinking on this end. I am crushed for time so much write this without so much as an edit. Please excuse any errors but your post is important and deserves dialogue.

    As you and others see, there are mixed issues.

    Firstly, on Grisham: the man has been a walking disaster for years. He looks onto current topics that spark high emotion, and pretends to be a champion. Many people – especially civilians who never were in uniform – will salute anything that pulls on a uniform. Grisham uses this vulnerability as a pry bar and truncheon.

    But if you look closely, or even take 30 minutes to research, you will see that the 2nd Amendment is only Grisham’s latest “calling.” Before that it was numerous other issues, such as PTSD, or school uniforms. Please google “school uniforms, CJ Grisham, Alabama”, and find that years ago he had another media rage going where he so frightened the school board that they wanted a restraining order.

    The school uniform thing did not get much traction, but he did again raise money for a legal defense, which he never needed. It was a scam. (More recently, Grisham raised more than $50,000 in cash using Indiegogo for the Temple case.)

    After the Alabama school uniform jihad, Grisham went on his PTSD jihad, claiming he had taken out an Iraqi squad with a grenade and a 9mm pistol. Having myself been close witness to about three years of combat, I have never even heard of such a feat in Iraq or Afghanistan.

    He did receive a Bronze Star with V from the same Division and time as Jessica Lynch got her same fraudulent award. Please also remember that Pat Tillman (true hero) over in Afghanistan posthumously got a totally fraudulent silver star.

    Folks who have spent much time in combat with the US Army know that awards are handed out like candy. (Not so much with Marines or British.) Some awards are deserved – I saw a friend earn a Silver Star just ten feet from me, and was taking pictures when he got into hand-to-hand combat and won.

    Pictures here: http://www.michaelyon-online.com/gates-of-fire.htm

    Some medals are deserved, but others like Grisham’s are in some form or another fraudulent. I received Grisham’s award through FOIA, and indeed he did not take out any squad. The award was administrative. It was issued for a period of time (more than 30 days), and was fraudulent per se because his commander signed it two days before the period ended.

    In other words, he got a Bronze Star with V, in advance. (I can email you the award upon request.) It is stunning that a commander would issue a Bronze Star with V in advance! Grisham has committed a form of Stolen Valor, and his commander facilitated it. Grisham did not take out an Iraqi squad, much less with merely a grenade and 9mm.

    And this goes back to the larger problem, for which Grisham is only a symptom: The Army leadership is breaking.

    That Army leadership allows and perpetuates this behavior is a far bigger problem than the “Grishams.” This is not about the Grishams, but a leadership who encourages dishonesty by signing awards in advance, and turning a blind eye to unprofessional behavior.

    ==Break==

    Now to another issue: the 2nd Amendment. I am an Army veteran and today a writer who grew up with dogs and guns. Guns were as normal to me around the house as my bicycle in the garage. Many a dinner on the table started from my .22 or shotgun. Like many people of my time, the 2nd Amendment was something I took for granted as a kid. Today, I am deeply concerned.

    From my view, what I see with this In-Your-Face open carry to Starbucks and Wal-Mart, is behavior that undermines our 2nd Amendment. We all know that the Constitution has been eroded to the point where it appears to have suffered from an acid attack. It is getting worse.

    When I was a kid, I could shoot as much ammo as my budget from small jobs would allow, but there was another controversy brewing: public smoking.

    Public smoking was a huge deal back then. People still smoked on airplanes, in elevators, on buses and trains, in coffee shops and restaurants.

    As a kid, I was hugely into sports, and wanted to do well in football, baseball, etc., and I saw all this smoke as a threat to my winning (and even living). But to bring this up to smokers invited bullying and tirades about THEIR rights.

    To say, “I don’t care if you smoke, that is your right, but why do you smoke in this elevator? It stinks up my clothes and my lunges,” invited bullying as a response.

    Today, I remember the many arrogant, ignorant smokers, who bullied people like me because we were young and small.

    Many smokers were polite and understood that others have rights, too. But even those polite smokers’ rights were now being undermined by the arrogant and ignorant smokers, who were doing at the time what amounts to open carry in Starbucks: they were rubbing THEIR rights into the faces of others, who also have rights. They were being bullies who thought that they could not be knocked flat.

    And now I am all grown up. Millions of other kids who suffered the bullying from in-your-face smokers are also grown up. Revenge is ours. We do not care if smokers must stand 25 feet from a storefront to light up. We do not care if they have to go outside in a blizzard to smoke. We do not care about their rights because too many of them did not care about ours, and they were bullies. Every body hates a bully.

    Today, even the responsible smokers have to go out into the blizzard to smoke.

    The same is happening today with these open carry demonstrations at Starbucks, Wal-Mart, etc. These are in-your-face affronts to millions of people either in person, or through the media. Grisham the Stolen Valor guy is bullying his way, and those like him will affect our rights unless we push back and say these actions do not represent us.

    In a different era, these guys blew smoke in the elevators because they could.

    We will all be out in the blizzard if create a “clash of rights.” We have a right to bear arms, and everyone else also has rights. Eventually, in one more generation or two, private gun ownership will face millions of new voters who feel wronged, and the rest is history.

    A bully always eventually loses.

    • Michael,

      I cannot express how much of an honor and privilege it is to receive your reply. Your post gave me a great deal more insight into Grisham and strangely enough, a light went on when you mentioned his case in Alabama. I actually remembered hearing about it when visiting family in Birmingham that year. The man is indeed a professional victim.

      On open carry, I don’t have a problem with an organized open carry event as it’s less likely to cause alarm. However, it seems many “activists” are indeed being bullies. I also suspect that many are completely ignorant that nearly identical behavior in the 1960s was the direct cause for the drafting and passage of the Mulford Act in California.

      As you likely know, the Mulford Act as championed by a conservative Republican and backed by the NRA. Granted, at issue was concern over the behavior and intent of Huey Newton’s Black Panthers. In the 1960s, the idea of disarming blacks, and black militants was a pretty easy sell. However; the fact remains, the intentional intimidation and “in your face” attitude of demanding rights that already existed was actually what led to said rights being taken away.

      I am not sure how many people in the open carry crowd fully understand this.

      -Gary

      • Gary,

        A policy letter at Fort Hood revolves around this story:

        http://www.kxxv.com/story/23405676/fort-hood-issues-new-policy-after-soldiers-protest-for-open-carry-rights?clienttype=generic&smartdevicecgbypass

        FORT HOOD –
        After several confrontations between soldiers and civilian police, Fort hood has created a new policy.

        In an email outlining the policy, Fort Hood says, “There is a growing trend of soldiers assigned to fort hood openly carrying firearms in private business establishments.”

        When approached by police, they say soldiers have been refusing to cooperate with civilian police officers who try to assess if the guns are a threat to the public.

        The local owner of B&K Pawn believes some of this confrontation may come from confusing gun laws.

        “It seems like a double edge sword the military people under 21 can carry a handgun in pursuit of their duties on Fort Hood,” explains Scott McComas. “But once they step off of Fort Hood they aren’t really able to carry a firearm because they are not of age.”

        This new policy intends to clear things up without overruling state law. Fort Hood Major General Anthony Ierardi is now requiring all military personnel to show proper identification at officer’s requests.

        The policy reads, “Soldiers are prohibited from refusing to present a driver’s license or military identification card to any law enforcement in the exercise of his or her official duties, upon request by the law enforcement officer.”

        Jean Tran, military spouse and owner of JT Sports gun store in Copperas Cove, says soldiers should have the right to carry, but they should also obtain a concealed handgun license.

        “Prove you are a U.S. soldier, you serve your country. Be proud about it, don’t be worried like ‘oh why should I show you my I.D.’ That’s not necessary.”

        Violation of the new policy falls under Article 92 UCMJ.

        According to Article 92 3.a. violators could receive a maximum punishment of two thirds loss of pay for three months, or confinement for three months.

      • Gary, you got zero insight from Michael Yon. You got absolute lies. Not sure why this was sent to me today when the post is about two years old, but it did. Michael Yon has ZERO proof because it’s impossible to have proof of inaccurate information. I have a novel idea, Gary. How about instead of asking a guy that hides in Thailand so he doesn’t have to face justice in American for his slander, libel, and defamation, you go straight to the source and talk to me instead? My email is cj@opencarrytexas.org. If you know anything about the military, you’ll be able to read what Yon sends and see that it’s incomplete because the Army doesn’t hand out information about active duty troops. Yon also has a fundamental lack of understanding of the Army awards process. A DA638 is completely different than a certificate, which is what Yon signed. In other words, the DA638 is approved before the certificate and will have different dates. So, if you actually care about facts, reach out to me and not a guy who has been kicked off more military embeds than a flea off a cat.

  4. Grisham is an attention whore. He is no Second Amendment icon. He is a narcissistic personality who sent his daughter shopping for a prom dress after receiving donations from strangers for his legal defense. How do we know? Grisham triumphantly tweeted hitting a fundraising milestone.

    That the US Army refuses to curb him makes the Army complicit in his serial misconduct. Grisham is a walking and endlessly talking indictment of Army dysfunctionality.

Leave a Reply