What Life Looked Like 100 Years Ago in America

California Cops

The Great 1984 Los Angeles Olympic SWAT Lobster Caper

California Cops

Same Old, Same Old at the Los Angeles Times by JACK DUNPHY

AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes
Credit the Los Angeles Times for steadfastness. As the paper hemorrhages money, as the staff continues to shrink, as all available evidence suggests their business model is a failure, those who remain with the failing enterprise continue to advance the same leftist tropes. It’s like watching a church choir that feels it must sing all the louder as its members fall away and the pews before it grow more empty with each passing Sunday.I grew up reading the LA Times in my parents’ home, then started my own subscription while attending college. I have witnessed the paper’s transformation from a reliably conservative outlet to a reliably liberal one, but even as that evolution occurred, one could still find a semblance of objectivity and journalistic talent on its pages.

The lurch to the left continued, however, and now the LA Times has metamorphosed into some hideous amalgam of the Daily Worker, the Advocate, and the bulletin board in some Williams College freshman dorm. Nowhere has the paper’s leftward drift been more evident than in its coverage of crime and law enforcement.

The latest example is a March 7 editorial that lamented the 30th anniversary of California’s “three strikes” law, which mandated lengthy prison sentences for repeat felons. In their lamentation, the editors cite the woeful tale of Jerry Dewayne Williams, who in 1995 received a sentence of 25 years to life for having committed what they would have their readers believe was the mere theft of a slice of pizza.

Though initially charged with robbery, Williams was convicted of the lesser felony of “petty theft with a prior.” Nevertheless, his rap sheet was of sufficient opulence to trigger the three strikes law. In writing about Williams in 2010, by which time he had petitioned for and won his release from prison, the Times called him the “pizza thief,” as though his crime, like Jean Valjean’s in “Les Miserables,” had been motivated by hunger. Though elided completely in the recent editorial — and nearly completely in the 2010 story — the circumstances of the pizza theft were more sinister than the Times would have its readers believe.

Williams and some companions were on the Redondo Beach pier one evening in 1994 when they came across four children, ages 7 to 15, sharing a pizza. Williams walked up and hovered menacingly over the children, picked up a slice of pizza, and began eating it as though daring them to try to stop him. Fearful of being assaulted by Williams and his friends, they did nothing. But they did report the incident to their parents, who called the police, who in turn found Williams nearby and arrested him.

Though the jury deadlocked on the robbery charge, Williams’s conduct clearly met the elements of California Penal Code section 211, which defines robbery as the “felonious taking of personal property in the possession of another, from his person or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear.” Williams didn’t take the pizza merely to satisfy a craving; he did it for the thrill he received from intimidating four children. He told police that after taking one bite from the slice he threw the rest in the ocean. Note that in the law cited above, no minimum value of the stolen property is established; it is the conduct that is punished regardless of how trivial the loss. (I once arrested a man and saw him sentenced to prison for robbing one of his neighbors of 75 cents.)

But the minimization of Williams’s misdeed is far from the most glaring defect in the editorial. It notes correctly that by the time California’s three strikes law was passed in 1994, the crime wave that inspired it had already crested, but it goes on to say that crime saw a historic plunge, though without attributing any of that plunge to the law the Times today condemns. “A host of tough-on-crime measures followed from both Republicans and Democrats,” said the editors, “even as crime continued its free fall.”

But to the editors at the LA Times, crime was in “free fall,” as though affected by nothing other than some mysterious elemental force akin to gravity, a force that causes crime to rise or fall regardless of what methods are employed to combat it.

But again, credit the LA Times for consistency in their error on law enforcement matters. They endorsed George Gascón in his recent primary campaign to remain as Los Angeles County district attorney, and no doubt will do so again as he faces former federal prosecutor Nathan Hochman in November’s general election. In their endorsement, the editors wrote that the number of felony cases his office has filed “is on par with that of earlier administrations.” This may be true, as far as it goes, but the number of filings is not the only or most reliable indicator of his office’s commitment to public safety. “The argument that Gascón is lax or lenient on crime,” say the Times editors, “simply does not hold up to the facts.”

Is that so? Then why, we may ask, is it still Gascón’s policy not to seek increased felony sentences under circumstances in which California law explicitly calls for them?

Here are some facts the LA Times editors may have overlooked: In the city of Los Angeles, year to date, homicides are up by 16%, robberies by 14%, and burglaries by 4%. In 77th Street Division, one of the city’s 21 patrol stations, homicides are up by 167% and burglaries are up by 56%.

The question is a simple one: Where would we prefer criminals to live, in our neighborhoods or in prison?

A Victory! All About Guns California Gun Fearing Wussies

California Gun Control Gets Flattened Again


Back when California was a going concern


IN-N-Out Says This About California before Closing Its Doors For Good!

For those who don’t know, In-n-out is a burger chain that has almost a cult following. (I like them myself but I have eaten better burgers else where)  Also Oakland is one of those places  where if you don’t REALLY have to go there then you don’t) I hope that this clears things up a bit. Grumpy

All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

Big Win Overturns California Gun Control Law

All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California You have to be kidding, right!?!

1 million rounds of ammo, hundreds of illegal firearms seized in Bay Area home, AG Bonta says

RICHMOND, Calif. (KGO) — California Attorney General Rob Bonta Thursday announced the arrest of a suspect in the city of Richmond with a large cache of illegal firearms.

This includes assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, and approximately one million rounds of ammunition. Officials say the suspect is allegedly not legally allowed to own firearms.

“This arrest demonstrates exactly why the Armed and Prohibited Persons System is vital for the safety of our communities,” Bonta said in a press release. “In our efforts to retrieve guns from a prohibited individual, we found hundreds of allegedly illegal weapons and approximately one million rounds of ammunition.”

Bonta’s office said on Jan. 21, investigators from multiple agencies assisted in serving a search warrant at the suspect’s residence in Richmond. During the search, several suspected grenades were discovered and the Walnut Creek Police Department Bomb Squad and Travis Air

Force Base Bomb Squad were asked to respond. The grenades were found to be inert.

Officials say they seized approximately 11 military-style machine guns, 133 handguns, 37 rifles, 60 assault rifles, 7 shotguns, 20 silencers, 4 flare guns, 3,000 large capacity magazines, approximately one million rounds of miscellaneous caliber ammunition, and dozens of rifle receivers and pistol frames.

In 2006, California became first state to establish the Armed and Prohibited Persons System – which tracks firearm owners who are prohibited from owning weapons.

It is not clear why the suspect in this case is prohibited from owning weapons.

From link – “It is not clear why the suspect in this case is prohibited from owning weapons.”

It’s not clear because they’re blowing smoke up your ass. Here’s some back story from another web site I visit ( –

Bud was living the dream we all have..

But, there was nothing illegal about his collection. Here is the real story.

This is from a similar article and if true the state is lying to everyone.

My friend is a local FFL that does contract work for the Police Department and Sheriff’s Department where this happened and he gave me some background to this case a few days ago. The man who this stuff belonged to is in his 90s and a relative of his had to obtain legal guardianship over the man because he is suffering from advanced dementia which is why he is no longer legally allowed to possess firearms.

The man has not lived in the house where his collection was stored for the better part of 6 years because he’s living in a nursing home. The majority of the firearms have been owned for more than 40 years well before they were ever regulated in California and the man has possessed a special federal firearms license called a Curios and Relic license for the better part of 60 years that allowed him under California law to possess machine guns.

The actual machine guns that were in the man’s possession are ones that are legally owned and are registered with the NFA and the tax has been paid on them. The authorities have been well aware of what was in his possession because he registered them with the state when they required it. They’re simply pretending like this man is a criminal once they found out he was no longer mentally fit to possess the firearms and gleefully seized his collection.

Seems the state is lying about the circumstances of this case and tried to make it look like they made a huge bust.

California COOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guess where this is!

All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California Gun Fearing Wussies You have to be kidding, right!?!

Maybe, California To Require ANNUAL Firearm “Registration” Just Like Your Vehicle