ReportWire

Tag: gun

  • DEA promoted L.A. agent who pointed gun at colleague despite history of issues

    [ad_1]

    David Doherty was standing at his desk inside the Los Angeles headquarters of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration when a supervisor from another office stormed in hurling profanities.

    Doherty testified at a preliminary hearing in a San Fernando courtroom earlier this year that a fellow agent, James Young, got “face to face” with Doherty and challenged him to a fight without provocation.

    Doherty said he tried to deescalate by hugging Young and saying it was “all good brother,” according to his testimony. But then, Doherty said, he felt Young’s DEA-issued handgun jammed against his midsection.

    “I got you motherf—,” Doherty recalled Young saying.

    Young then aimed the weapon at Doherty’s face, according to the agent’s testimony.

    James Young allegedly pointed a gun at a fellow federal agent during a 2022 incident at the Drug Enforcement Agency office in Los Angeles.

    (Al Seib / For The Times)

    Staring down the barrel of a gun wielded by an official who, at that time in 2022, oversaw roughly 30 officers in the DEA’s Ventura County office, Doherty told the court, he wrestled Young to the ground and disarmed him.

    More than two years later, Los Angeles County prosecutors charged Young, 54, with assault over the incident.

    It was one of several bizarre moments that led Young to exit the DEA — but only after the agency promoted him twice despite documented concerns about his behavior and mental health.

    The Times reviewed a Los Angeles police report Doherty filed about the alleged attack along with DEA disciplinary records and internal e-mails.

    The records show DEA officials were well aware of Young’s concerning behavior, yet still gave him increased responsibilities. One high-ranking DEA official even tried to dissuade Doherty from reporting the attack to police, according to the agent’s testimony and the LAPD report.

    After Doherty’s preliminary hearing testimony, Young was held to answer on on multiple charges for crimes he allegedly committed between 2022 and 2024, including a road rage incident, domestic violence and illegal possession of a stockpile of guns, ammo and grenades.

    Young, who remains free on bond, has pleaded not guilty to all charges. He declined to comment. His defense attorney, Jeff Voll, said he plans to ask a judge to grant Young entry into a diversion program due to mental health issues, but offered no further details about his client or the case.

    A DEA spokeswoman said she could not respond to media inquiries because of the federal government shutdown, though the agency has previously declined to comment on The Times reporting about Young.

    Young’s first issues at the DEA arose in 2012, while he was on assignment in Tokyo. That year, he was sent home after a “medical evaluation” that determined he had issues that were “preventing or impeding his ability to perform the requisite tasks and duties of his position,” according to a treatment agreement between Young and the DEA reviewed by The Times.

    Young was required to attend therapy for “mental health issues” and “alcohol abuse,” the document shows.

    Young was also suspended for two days due to “improper operation of a government vehicle and poor judgment” while in Tokyo, according to a DEA disciplinary notice.

    Young was reassigned to Los Angeles in 2013 and eventually put in charge of the DEA’s satellite office in Ventura County, according to Doherty’s testimony.

    In 2021, an agent filed a complaint against Young accusing him of making “volatile, unprofessional phone calls” and “inappropriate comments” toward subordinates, according to an e-mail reviewed by The Times. It was not clear what, if anything, the DEA did about the complaint.

    Two federal law enforcement officials who requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly told The Times that many agents sensed something was “off” with Young, with both recounting stories of colleagues concerned about how he handled firearms.

    Doherty testified that after the gun incident at the DEA’s L.A. office in 2022, he felt like higher-ups at the agency tried to protect Young.

    “I didn’t feel like it was being handled appropriately, and I kind of saw the writing on the wall, that it was something DEA was trying to brush under the rug,” Doherty said in court.

    Doherty made a report at LAPD’s Central Division station shortly after the shooting. In it, he said another DEA official in L.A., Assistant Special Agent in Charge Brian Clark, tried to discourage him from going to police. Clark warned Doherty that Young could actually seek to press assault charges against him, according to the report, which did not explain Clark’s rationale.

    Clark, who is now the special agent in charge of the Los Angeles field office, did not respond to an e-mail seeking comment.

    The LAPD investigation stopped when the head of the DEA’s Los Angeles field office, Bill Bodner, called then-LAPD Deputy Chief Al Labrada and claimed jurisdiction over the incident, according to the police report.

    Bodner left the DEA in 2023, according to his LinkedIn profile. He and Labrada did not respond to questions from The Times. A spokesperson for the LAPD did not respond to an inquiry about the case.

    The U.S. Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General eventually presented a criminal case to local prosecutors in December 2022, according to a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office. But the assault charges related to the attack at the field office weren’t filed until June 2025. The spokeswoman declined to explain the delay.

    Young retired from the DEA in 2024, but was allowed to collect a paycheck on administrative leave for roughly 18 months after the alleged attack on Doherty, according to two federal law enforcement officials.

    In September 2024, Young allegedly got into an argument with a driver on the 405 Freeway, bumped the other vehicle with his car and then brandished a handgun at the victim, according to a criminal complaint.

    The day after the road rage incident, Young allegedly attacked his wife and placed her in a wrestling hold, applying pressure to her head and neck, authorities said. A subsequent search of Young’s Saugus home by L.A. County sheriff’s deputies turned up 30,000 rounds of ammunition, several grenades, a sawed-off shotgun and modified credentials to make it appear that Young was still an active DEA agent.

    Investigators also found what was described in court filings as a video of a “gang-style execution” being played on a loop on a large screen.

    If convicted as charged, Young faces up to 29 years in state prison.

    In the Doherty incident, text messages displayed in court show Young claimed he didn’t realize why pulling his gun was wrong until after it happened.

    “Brother I love you. I would die for you. I’m sorry for not reading things right. I thought we were playing, but I know I f— up and misread the situation,” Young wrote to Doherty. “Pls forgive me … I’ll never do anything to hurt you. Please forgive me for pulling my gun. You can file against me. I concede that.”

    [ad_2]

    James Queally

    Source link

  • Publix to allow open carry in Florida stores, prompting mixed reactions from shoppers

    [ad_1]

    Shoppers are split after supermarket chain Publix announced it will now allow customers to openly carry firearms inside its Florida stores.

    The decision comes about two weeks after an appeals court ruling overturned the state’s ban on open carry

    Under the law, businesses and private property owners can choose whether to allow or ban open carry on their premises.

    They say it’s “where shopping is a pleasure,” but now, customers may see fellow shoppers walking the aisles with a pistol on their hip at their neighborhood Publix.

    Some Publix customers support the move, others express safety concerns

    “I believe it can cause unnecessary stress and drama,” Publix customer Scott Gonzalez said. “It needs to stop being political and it needs to be more about the safety of our community.”

    Some shoppers say the change gives them a sense of awareness and control.

    “I feel like if you’re going to carry a gun, I’d rather know that it’s on your person than be caught off guard and have it brought out without me even being aware,” customer Erica McKeon told CBS News Miami. “At least I can walk away from the person if I see a gun and I’m not comfortable.”

    Others worry the sight of firearms in stores could cause anxiety.

    “As someone that has a concealed carry permit, I’m not that against open carry,” customer Dominic Carissimi said. “But in terms of other people that aren’t used to being around guns and things like that, it can cause unnecessary, like, I guess, stress and anxiety.”

    McKeon added, “I support our governor and I believe that if he’s allowing this that he has our best interests in mind.”

    Publix cites compliance with Florida law and respect for customers

    A Publix spokesperson released a statement, saying in part:

    “Publix follows all federal, state and local laws. Treating customers with dignity and respect is a founding belief at Publix. In any instance where a customer creates a threatening, erratic, or dangerous shopping experience—whether they are openly carrying a firearm or not—we will engage local law enforcement to protect our customers and associates.”

    Publix runs stores in eight states: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia.

    The grocery chain has more than 1,421 supermarket locations in those states, and over 900 location in Florida.

    Open carry laws in other states where Publix operates 

    Several of the states where Publix operates already allowed some form of open carry, even before Florida’s recent policy change. 

    In Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia, gun owners can generally carry firearms openly without a permit, though each state has its own set of restrictions.

    Alabama, Georgia and Kentucky all have so-called “permitless carry” laws, which allow most adults legally allowed to possess a firearm to carry it openly or concealed. 

    North Carolina and Tennessee also permit open carry, while South Carolina’s legislature recently joined that group by passing a law allowing people to carry handguns openly without a permit.

    Virginia also allows open carry, though its rules are more restrictive than most of its southern neighbors. Local governments there can prohibit firearms in certain public areas, and restrictions apply to specific types of guns, including semi-automatic weapons in some localities. 

    In all, that means nearly every state on Publix’s operating map already permitted open carry in some form. 

    It is unclear if the grocery chain allows open carry in its stores in other states beside Florida. In 2019, Publix’s publicly stated that it “respectfully requests that only law enforcement officials openly carry firearms in our stores,” even in states where open carry is legally allowed. 

    Winn-Dixie takes a different stance on Florida open carry

    While Publix is allowing open carry, competitors like Winn-Dixie say they will not permit customers to openly carry firearms inside their stores.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • SA Police Commissioner cleared over 1990s firearm incident

    [ad_1]

    South Australia’s corruption watchdog has cleared Police Commissioner Grant Stevens of a discipline breach for accidentally discharging his firearm during a house raid in the early 1990s.

    Commissioner Stevens had revealed in July that when he was a senior constable stationed in the northern suburbs in the early 1990s, he accidentally discharged his firearm while attempting a raid on a suspected drug dealer’s property.

    The revelation came after The Sunday Mail published a story about the incident a week earlier, but only referred to a “high-ranking South Australian police officer”.

    In a rare public statement on Tuesday, Independent Commissioner Against Corruption (ICAC) Emma Townsend revealed her agency had launched an investigation in July to examine whether the December 1990 incident constituted a breach of discipline by Commissioner Stevens.

    The investigation “refuted” the “alleged breaches of discipline”, the ICAC said.

    “The allegations made regarding the conduct of the Commissioner of Police have been independently investigated and found to be without substance,” Ms Townsend stated.

    She said the firearm incident in question “was reported on the day it occurred, in accordance with the applicable procedures”.

    “It was thoroughly investigated in accordance with those procedures,” she said.

    “That investigation was appropriately documented. The investigation resulted in then-Senior Constable Stevens receiving additional training.

    “He was not otherwise subject to any disciplinary proceedings. This was an appropriate outcome.”

    The ICAC found the allegations made regarding the conduct of the commissioner were “without substance”. (ABC News: Che Chorley)

    In its June article about the firearm incident, The Sunday Mail reported there had been a second incident “several months” after the first in which the commissioner again accidentally fired his gun.

    But the commissioner strongly rejected that claim, insisting there had “only ever been one occasion that I have accidentally discharged my firearm” — a view that was upheld by the ICAC.

    “The second alleged incident involving the discharge of a firearm did not occur,” the commissioner said.

    Ms Townsend said the ICAC’s investigation obtained and examined “relevant documents and witness statements” and reviewed the police commissioner’s file from 1991.

    She said while such investigations were typically conducted by SA Police’s Internal Investigation Section, the circumstances in this particular case were different.

    “ICAC considered the fact that the matter involved the Commissioner of Police, SA Police’s highest-ranked police officer, and that the allegations had been the subject of media reporting,” Ms Townsend said.

    “In these circumstances, an independent investigation of the matter by ICAC was likely to promote and maintain public confidence in SA Police, and was consistent with the purposes of the PCD Act.”

    While SA Police said Commissioner Stevens would not be commenting on the matter, the commissioner previously said he did not find the revelations “damaging” and that he had never “shied away from” discussing the incident with other officers.

    “I’ve actually relayed the story on occasions over the last 34 years for different reasons to let other police officers understand how fragile circumstances can be,” he said.

    “It serves as a lesson to the community that policing has inherent risks in it, mistakes do happen.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Supreme Court will decide if gun owners have a right to carry in parks, beaches, stores

    [ad_1]

    The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide if licensed guns owners have a right to carry their weapons at public places, including parks, beaches and stores.

    At issue are laws in California, Hawaii and three other states that generally prohibit carrying guns on private or public property.

    Three years ago, Supreme Court ruled that law-abiding gun owners had a 2nd Amendment right to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon when they leave home.

    But the justices left open the question of whether states and cities could prohibit the carrying of guns in “sensitive locations,” and if so, where.

    In response, California enacted a strict law that forbids gun owners from carrying their firearm in most public or private places that are open to the public unless the owner posted a sign permitting such weapons.

    The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down that provision last year as going too far, but it upheld most of a Hawaii law that restricted the carrying of guns at public places and most private businesses that are open to the public.

    Gun-rights advocates appealed to the Supreme Court and urged the justices to rule that such restrictions on carrying concealed weapons violate the 2nd Amendment.

    The court agreed to hear the case early next year.

    Trump administration lawyers urged the justices to strike down the Hawaii law.

    It “functions as a near-complete ban on public carry. A person carrying a handgun for self-defense commits a crime by entering a mall, a gas station, a convenience store, a supermarket, a restaurant, a coffee shop, or even a parking lot,” said Solicitor General D. John Sauer.

    Gun-control advocates said Hawaii had enacted a “common sense law that prohibits carrying firearms on others’ private property open to the public.”

    “The 9th Circuit was absolutely right to say it’s constitutional to prohibit guns on private property unless the owner says they want guns there,” said Janet Carter, managing director of Second Amendment Litigation, at Everytown Law. “This law respects people’s right to be safe on their own property, and we urge the Supreme Court to uphold it.”

    [ad_2]

    David G. Savage

    Source link

  • POLICE: Tigard Man Linked To Three Gun-Related Incidents In One Week – KXL

    [ad_1]


    TIGARD, Ore. – A man suspected in a weekend shooting at a Tigard restaurant is now facing multiple charges after being connected to two other alleged gun-related incidents in the city within a one-week span.

    Victor Gonzalez-Osegura, 56, remains in the Washington County Jail on 10 charges stemming from three separate cases, including first- and second-degree assault — both Measure 11 crimes — and being a felon in possession of a firearm. Police say the same gun was used in all three incidents and has since been recovered.

    The first incident occurred on Sept. 23, when officers responded to reports of shots fired at the Tigard Plaza Shopping Center at Southwest 99W and Hall Boulevard. Witnesses told police a man fired several rounds into the air before driving off. No injuries were reported.

    Three days later, on Sept. 26, officers were called to another shopping center across the street after a man matching Gonzalez-Osegura’s description allegedly pointed a gun at two employees during a dispute at a cell phone store.

    On Sept. 27, Gonzalez-Osegura was arrested following a shooting at a local restaurant that left one man seriously injured. The victim has since been released from the hospital and is expected to make a full recovery.

    More about:


    [ad_2]

    Grant McHill

    Source link

  • Sara Jane Moore, whose attempt to assassinate President Ford shocked the nation, dies at 95

    [ad_1]

    Sara Jane Moore, the former psychiatric patient who tried to assassinate President Ford during an era of astonishing violence and upheaval in California, died Wednesday at a nursing home in Franklin, Tenn.

    Moore, who retreated to North Carolina after serving 32 years in federal prison but then was jailed again late in life, was 95. News of her death was confirmed by Demetria Kalodimos, executive producer at the Nashville Banner, who developed a relationship with Moore over the last two years. A cause of death was not reported, but Kalodimos said Moore had been bedridden for about 15 months after a fall.

    As shocking as Moore’s attempt to kill the president was, it seemed a little less so during the frenetic 1970s.

    It was 1975 in San Francisco. Charles Manson was on death row, kidnap victim-turned-accomplice Patty Hearst had just been arrested, and a very young governor named Jerry Brown was in his first year in office.

    Moore chose this moment for a shocking crime in an era nearly defined by them — on Sept. 22, 1975, she tried to assassinate Ford in front of the fashionable St. Francis Hotel.

    She was the second would-be assassin to confront the 38th president in the space of a month.

    Her bullet missed, thanks to the quick reflexes of a former Marine standing next to her.

    The attempt came just 17 days after a Manson follower in a nun’s habit, Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, pointed a gun at Ford in Sacramento. It was never clear whether she tried to pull the trigger.

    News accounts of the time portrayed Moore as an enigma. They emphasized her supposedly conventional past. She was described as an average housewife and mother whose conversion to radical politics seemed an unlikely twist. She herself insisted she had been a relatively normal suburbanite before joining the leftist underground.

    It wasn’t true. Moore’s entire adult life had been punctuated by mental health issues, divorces and suicide attempts. Many people who knew her described her as unstable and mercurial.

    Born Sara Jane Kahn on Feb. 15, 1930, in Charleston, W. Va., Moore had been an aspiring actress and nurse before finding work as a bookkeeper. She married five times, was estranged from her family, and abandoned three of her children. A fourth remained in her care at the time of the attempted assassination. Her erratic behavior had cost her jobs, and she had been treated for mental illness numerous times.

    This history led some, including Ford himself, to conclude that she was “off her mind,” as the former president said in a 2004 CNN interview.

    She was in her mid-40s, divorced and living in Danville, outside San Francisco, when she went to work in 1974 as a bookkeeper for People in Need. The organization had been set up to distribute food in response to ransom demands by the Symbionese Liberation Army, the extreme leftist group that had kidnapped Hearst in early 1974 and shortly after engaged in a furious gun battle with Los Angeles police, one of the longest shootouts in U.S. history.

    Moore’s ties to other radical organizations were murky. She would later cast herself as a sought-after FBI informant who had come to live in fear of some unspecified threat. Its source was either from the government or her radical brethren, depending on the interview. Authorities downplayed this, saying her occasional calls to agents and local police officers were unsolicited.

    Hearst had been arrested a few days before the assassination attempt. The day before, the 45-year-old Moore had been detained by San Francisco police officers who seized a gun from her. She made a vague threat and the Secret Service was alerted, but agents concluded she was not dangerous and released her.

    Moore immediately bought a .38 caliber revolver.

    Wearing polka-dot slacks, she went to the hotel where Ford was speaking to the World Affairs Council. She waited outside, and raised her arm to fire when the president emerged at 3:30 p.m. Oliver Sipple, a disabled former Marine standing next to her, saw the weapon and deflected her arm just as the gun went off.

    The bullet went over the president’s head, ricocheted and injured a taxi driver. The president’s security detail rushed to the airport, and Ford was whisked out of California as fast as possible.

    After her arrest, acquaintances said Moore was very concerned that people would assume she was mentally ill. She alluded often to her political motives for trying to kill Ford. Reporters eagerly interviewed her to learn more, but she never seemed able to clearly explain her political agenda.

    Her lawyers were preparing a defense related to her mental condition when she abruptly pleaded guilty, against their advice. She was given a life sentence with a possibility of parole. Moore’s attempt prompted Senate scrutiny of presidential security.

    “Am I sorry I tried?” Moore said at her sentencing. “Yes and no. Yes, because it accomplished little except to throw away the rest of my life, although I realize there are those who think that’s the one good thing resulting from this. And no, I’m not sorry I tried, because at the time it seemed a correct expression of my anger.”

    Moore made headlines briefly again in 1979 when she escaped fbriefly from the Federal Reformatory for Women at Alderson, W.Va., by climbing a 12-foot fence.

    Otherwise, her prison years were uneventful. She was reported to fill her time with needlepoint and bookkeeping duties, and was paroled in 2007 at the age of 77 from a low-security federal facility for women in Dublin, east of San Francisco. Her parole was essentially grandfathered by federal rules that have since been tightened.

    “It was a time that people don’t remember,” Moore told NBC’s “Today” show in 2009. “You know we had a war … the Vietnam War, you became, I became, immersed in it. We were saying the country needed to change. The only way it was going to change was a violent revolution. I genuinely thought that [shooting Ford] might trigger that new revolution.”

    In 2015, Moore was interviewed remotely by CNN, her location only listed as North Carolina.

    Moore was jailed again in early 2019 when she was detained at JFK Airport for traveling outside the country without telling parole officials. Friends said she had become ill in Israel, forcing her to stay longer than she intended. She was released six months later.

    Moore maintained that she had not been influenced by Fromme’s assault on Ford. Fromme was paroled in 2009 and moved to upstate New York, largely disappearing. Both women were depicted in the Stephen Sondheim musical “Assassins,” which won a Tony Award in 2004.

    Sipple, who deflected the shot, was lauded as a hero but later sued several newspapers for invasion of privacy. He said media reports that he was gay had ruined his family relations, but he lost the case. He died in 1989.

    Subsequent attacks on public figures would eclipse Moore’s crime. Three years later, San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone were assassinated. John Lennon’s murder came two years after that, and John Hinckley Jr.’s shooting of President Reagan a few months later.

    Ford, who died of natural causes at age 93 in 2006, was said to be nonplussed by Moore’s attempt on his life. But other members of his entourage saw it as consistent with the place and time.

    Asked by the San Francisco Chronicle to sum up the event, Ford’s press secretary Ron Nessen, who was with him when he was targeted, framed it this way: “It was the ‘70s in San Francisco and California.”

    Leovy and Marble are former Times staff writers.

    [ad_2]

    Jill Leovy, Steve Marble

    Source link

  • Student arrested on suspicion of bringing gun to Brentwood campus

    [ad_1]

    BRENTWOOD – A student was arrested on suspicion of bringing a gun to school Tuesday in Brentwood, police said.

    [ad_2]

    Jason Green

    Source link

  • ‘Now an open carry state’: Court strikes down Florida’s open carry ban

    [ad_1]

    A state appeals court on Wednesday in a major decision ruled Florida’s ban on openly carrying guns is unconstitutional.A three-judge panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal, pointing to U.S. Supreme Court rulings on Second Amendment issues, said the open-carry ban is incompatible with the nation’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation.”The state’s Attorney General said his office “fully supports the Court’s decision.”He went on to say. “This is a big win for the Second Amendment rights of Floridians. As we’ve all witnessed over the last few days, our God-given right to self-defense is indispensable.”Lake County Commissioner Anthony Sabatini took to X and shared: “FLORIDA IS NOW AN OPEN CARRY STATE!””As a member of the Florida House of Representatives I fought for 4 years in Tallahassee for Open Carry—only to see my gun bills blocked by fake Republicans—thank you to Florida’s 1st District Court of Appeal for standing up for liberty while the Legislature failed.:Statement from the Orlando Police DepartmentThe Orlando Police Department does not provide opinions on legislative or judicial decisions. Our role is to uphold and enforce all applicable state laws and city ordinances as they are established.Statement from Flagler County Sheriff Rick Staly>> The News Service of Florida contributed to this story>> This is a developing story and will be updated

    A state appeals court on Wednesday in a major decision ruled Florida’s ban on openly carrying guns is unconstitutional.

    A three-judge panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal, pointing to U.S. Supreme Court rulings on Second Amendment issues, said the open-carry ban is incompatible with the nation’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

    The state’s Attorney General said his office “fully supports the Court’s decision.”

    He went on to say. “This is a big win for the Second Amendment rights of Floridians. As we’ve all witnessed over the last few days, our God-given right to self-defense is indispensable.”

    This content is imported from Twitter.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

    Lake County Commissioner Anthony Sabatini took to X and shared:

    “FLORIDA IS NOW AN OPEN CARRY STATE!”

    “As a member of the Florida House of Representatives I fought for 4 years in Tallahassee for Open Carry—only to see my gun bills blocked by fake Republicans—thank you to Florida’s 1st District Court of Appeal for standing up for liberty while the Legislature failed.:

    This content is imported from Twitter.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

    Statement from the Orlando Police Department

    The Orlando Police Department does not provide opinions on legislative or judicial decisions. Our role is to uphold and enforce all applicable state laws and city ordinances as they are established.

    Statement from Flagler County Sheriff Rick Staly

    This content is imported from Twitter.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.


    >> The News Service of Florida contributed to this story

    >> This is a developing story and will be updated


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Arrest log

    [ad_1]

    The following arrests were made recently by local police departments. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Massachusetts’ privacy law prevents police from releasing information involving domestic and sexual violence arrests with the goal to protect the alleged victims.

    LOWELL

    • Carlos Morales, 44, homeless; warrants (failure to appear for conspiracy to violate drug laws, trespassing, and possession of Class A drug).

    • Angela Lourm, 56, 28 Varney St., Lowell; operating motor vehicle without license, operation under influence of alcohol.

    • Craig Blanchard, 40, 51 View St., Dracut; assault and battery on police officer.

    • Ibrahim Kabba, 55, homeless; warrant (failure to appear for indecent exposure).

    • Jeffrey Mitchell, 18, homeless; warrants (failure to appear for negligent operation of motor vehicle, and unlicensed operation of motor vehicle), disorderly conduct.

    • Zachary Burgoyne, 27, 259 Sawmill Drive, Dracut; open and gross lewdness.

    • Jorge Santos, 46, 57 Marshall Ave., No. 3, Lowell; warrant (failure to appear for possession of Class B drug).

    • Michael Picardi, 38, homeless; warrant (destruction of property).

    • Josman Calo, 27, 83 Park Ave. W., Apt. 6, Lowell; unlawful carrying dangerous weapon/firearm, discharging gun within 500 feet of dwelling, unlawful possession of ammunition.

    • Nelson Gelardi, 44, 193 Middlesex St., Lowell; warrants (failure to appear for resisting arrest, disorderly conduct, larceny, and breaking and entering vehicle at night), possession of Class A drug.

    • Gordon Schofield, 43, homeless; warrant (failure to appear for larceny).

    • Michael Dalton, 35, 606 School St., Apt. 3, Lowell; operating motor vehicle after license suspension.

    • Christine Silva, 38, 273 Summer St., Lowell; trespassing.

    • Eddie Alvarez, 46, 193 Middlesex St., Lowell; trespassing.

    • Nysaiah Gonzalez, 19, 200 Massmills Drive, No. 219, Lowell; carrying firearm while loaded, carrying firearm without license, unlawful possession of large capacity feeding device.

    • Shawn McCarthy, 41, Lowell; warrants (failure to appear for assault and battery on person 60 or older/disabled, probation violation for threatening to commit crime).

    • Divene Sanabria, 31, 19 Varnum St., Lowell; warrant (fugitive from justice).

    • Siddhartha Sewell, 52, homeless; assault and battery with dangerous weapon (pepper spray).

    • Justin Walsh, 47, no fixed address; warrants.

    • Dennis Robinson, 41, homeless; warrant (possession of Class B drug).

    NASHUA, N.H.

    • Weston Strong, 36, 56 Gilman St., Nashua; simple assault.

    • Kenneth Gurski, 69, no fixed address; criminal trespass.

    • Kalif Ajene Brooks, 29, no fixed address; criminal trespass.

    • David Perez, 37, 2 Quincy St., Nashua; criminal trespass.

    • Eduardo Molina, 35, 48 Hampshire Drive, Apt. B, Nashua; suspension of vehicle registration.

    • Samantha Norton, 38, 53 Colonial Village, Somersworth, N.H.; willful concealment.

    • Alexander Bartholf, 38, no fixed address; simple assault.

    • Kevin Quilligana, 20, 18 E. Pearl St., Apt. 5, Nashua; operation of motor vehicle without valid license.

    • Miguel Cruz-Alvarado, 24, 66 Ash St., Nashua; disobeying officer.

    • Joseph Raso, 42, no fixed address; resisting arrest/detention.

    [ad_2]

    Staff Report

    Source link

  • 2-year-old dead, two adults in critical condition after shooting at a Melbourne home

    [ad_1]

    A 2-year-old is dead and two adults are in critical condition after being shot inside a home in Melbourne.Police say they responded to a report of a shooting at around 10 Friday night at a residence off Poplar Lane.Upon arrival, officers located three gunshot victims inside the home: two adults and a 2-year-old child.The child died at the scene while the adults were taken to the hospital.Police say the child and the adults are related. Police haven’t identified the victims, but family members tell WESH 2 it was a 2-year-old girl name Bless’yn and her grandparents. One neighbor said she knew the little girl’s family and this tragedy has shaken the entire street. This is an active and ongoing investigation, and investigators say further details will be released as they become available.>> This is a breaking news story and will be updated as more information is released.

    A 2-year-old is dead and two adults are in critical condition after being shot inside a home in Melbourne.

    Police say they responded to a report of a shooting at around 10 Friday night at a residence off Poplar Lane.

    Upon arrival, officers located three gunshot victims inside the home: two adults and a 2-year-old child.

    The child died at the scene while the adults were taken to the hospital.

    Police say the child and the adults are related. Police haven’t identified the victims, but family members tell WESH 2 it was a 2-year-old girl name Bless’yn and her grandparents.

    One neighbor said she knew the little girl’s family and this tragedy has shaken the entire street.

    This is an active and ongoing investigation, and investigators say further details will be released as they become available.

    >> This is a breaking news story and will be updated as more information is released.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Washington Teen Allowed Back to School After Getting Caught with Loaded Gun – KXL

    [ad_1]

    ARLINGTON, Wash. — A student at Arlington High School will be allowed to return to classes when they begin next week.  At least that is the plan for now according to Arlington Public Schools.

    A 14-year-old student was caught at school in February with a handgun that reportedly had a bullet in the chamber and also had a magazine full of bullets.  That student was expelled and charged with a felony.

    Fast forward to the 2025-2026 school year and the district says the student will be allowed to attend classes, but will have special rules to follow including the fact that they may not bring a backpack to school.  They’ll also be monitored daily.

    Many of the social media outlests have featured chatter from concerend parents.

    More about:

    [ad_2]

    Brett Reckamp

    Source link

  • Panel urges state to offer tax breaks for ‘personalized’ firearms

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A state panel is recommending that lawmakers carve out a sales tax break for “personalized” firearms as part of broader efforts to reduce gun deaths.

    In a report, the Special Legislative Commission on Emerging Firearm Technology calls for passage of legislation that would authorize a sales tax break for purchases of firearms equipped with the new technology and set penalties for firearms sellers and gun owners who violate the proposed regulations.


    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAm“%96 4@>>:DD:@? 7:?5D E92E A6CD@?2=:K65 7:C62C>D @776C 2 D:8?:7:42?E A@DD:3:=:EJ @7 C65F4:?8 7:C62C> 244:56?ED 2?5 562E9D[” E96 C6A@CE’D 2FE9@CD HC@E6] “v:G6? E96 9:896C AC:46 @7 E96D6 7:C62C>D[ E96 4@>>:DD:@? C64@>>6?5D E92E E96 |2DD249FD6EED v6?6C2= r@FCE AFCDF6 D2=6D E2I 6I6>AE:@?D E@ 6?4@FC286 E96:C AFC492D6]”k^Am

    kAm%96 4@>>:DD:@?[ H9:49 :?4=F565 DE2E6 =2H>2<6CD[ =2H 6?7@C46>6?E @77:4:2=D 2?5 w62=6J 25>:?:DEC2E:@? @77:4:2=D[ C64@>>6?565 E92E E96 {68:D=2EFC6 A2DD 2 =2H 5:C64E:?8 E96 DE2E6 tI64FE:G6 ~77:46 @7 !F3=:4 $276EJ 2?5 $64FC:EJ E@ “56E6C>:?6 E96 762D:3:=:EJ 2?5 G:23:=:EJ” @7 >:4C@DE2>A:?8 E649?@=@8J 2?5 DEF5J :ED 67764E:G6?6DD 😕 7@C6?D:4 :?G6DE:82E:@?D]k^Am

    kAm~E96C C64@>>6?52E:@?D :?4=F565 C6BF:C:?8 2== D6>:2FE@>2E:4 92?58F?D ?6H=J C68:DE6C65 😕 E96 DE2E6 36 6BF:AA65 H:E9 >:4C@DE2>A:?8 E649?@=@8J 2?5 D6E A6?2=E:6D 7@C 92?58F? >2?F724EFC6CD[ 5:DEC:3FE@CD 2?5 >6C492?ED H9@ 5@ ?@E 4@>A=J]k^Am

    kAm%96 D2=6D E2I 3C62< AC@A@D2= H@? E96 DFAA@CE @7 E96 8F? :?5FDECJ C6AC6D6?E2E:G6 @? E96 4@>>:DD:@? – y2<6 |4vF:82? @7 E96 }2E:@?2= $9@@E:?8 $A@CED u@F?52E:@? x?4][ H9@ G@E65 E@ DFAA@CE E96 E2I 3C62<]k^Am

    kAm%96 A2?6=[ 9@H6G6C[ H2D =2C86=J 5:G:565 @G6C 2 AC@A@D2= E@ 4C62E6 2 D2=6D E2I 6I6>AE:@? 7@C E96 AFC492D6 @7 2 A6CD@?2=:K65 7:C62C> H:E9 E96 “EC256:?” @7 2 ?@?A6CD@?2=:K65 7:C62C>] |4vF:82? 2?5 E96 EH@ #6AF3=:42?D @? E96 4@>>:DD:@? – $6?] !6E6C sFC2?E 2?5 #6A] s@?2=5 q6CE9:2F>6[ yC] – G@E65 282:?DE E92E @AE:@?[ 244@C5:?8 E@ E96 4@>>:DD:@?’D C6A@CE]k^Am

    kAmp >:4C@DE2>A:?86?23=65 7:C62C> 92D 2 F?:BF6 4@56 :>AC:?E65 @? :ED 7:C:?8 A:?[ DE2>A65 @?E@ 3F==6E 42CEC:586 42D:?8D 6249 E:>6 :E 😀 5:D492C865]k^Am

    kAm%9@D6 F?:BF6 :>AC:?ED :56?E:7J E96 7:C62C>’D >2<6[ >@56= 2?5 D6C:2= ?F>36C[ 2==@H:?8 =2H 6?7@C46>6?E E@ >2E49 DA6?E 42CEC:586 42D:?8D 7@F?5 2E 2 4C:>6 D46?6 E@ E96 DA64:7:4 7:C62C>D]k^Am

    kAm“%9:D :56?E:7:42E:@? >6E9@5 >2J D6CG6 2D 2?@E96C E@@= 2?5 @AA@CEF?:EJ 7@C =2H 6?7@C46>6?E E@ :?G6DE:82E6[ D@=G6[ 2?5 AC@D64FE6 8F? 4C:>6D[” E96 C6A@CE’D 2FE9@CD HC@E6] “(:E9 2 A@D:E:G6 :56?E:7:42E:@? @7 2? xu| 4@56[ :?G6DE:82E:@?D >2J =625 5:C64E=J E@ E96 7:C62C> :?G@=G65 😕 2 4C:>6 2?5 7FCE96C 6>A@H6C =2H 6?7@C46>6?E E@ =:?< D6A2C2E6 4C:>6D]”k^Am

    kAmqFE E96 E649?@=@8J 😀 ?6H=J 6>6C8:?8[ 2?5 D@ 72C @?=J EH@ &]$] >2?F724EFC6CD 2C6 😕 E96 AC@46DD @7 >2<:?8 A6CD@?2=:K65 H62A@?D[ @?=J @?6 @7 H9:49 92D 366? 2AAC@G65 7@C E96 >2C<6E[ 244@C5:?8 E@ E96 4@>>:DD:@?’D 7:?5:?8D] %96 A6CD@?2=:K65 H62A@?D 2=D@ 4@DE >F49 >@C6 E92? EC25:E:@?2= 7:C62C>D[ E96 C6A@CE’D 2FE9@CD ?@E65]k^Am

    kAm%@ 52E6[ @?=J 2 92?57F= @7 DE2E6D – :?4=F5:?8 }6H y6CD6J[ }6H *@C< 2?5 r2=:7@C?:2 – 92G6 2AAC@G65 =2HD >2?52E:?8 E92E 8F? C6E2:=6CD D6== 7:C62C>D H:E9 >:4C@DE2>A:?8 E649?@=@8J]k^Am

    kAm%96 }2E:@?2= #:7=6 pDD@4:2E:@? D2JD >:4C@DE2>A:?8 😀 2? “:?4@?D:DE6?E E649?@=@8J” E92E E6DED 92G6 D9@H? “42? 36 56762E65 H:E9 4@>>@? 92?5 E@@=D 😕 F?56C 2 >:?FE6]”k^Am

    kAm“$:?46 >:4C@DE2>A:?8 E649?@=@8J 42? 36 56762E65 😕 F?56C 2 >:?FE6 2?5 4C:>:?2=D 24BF:C6 8F?D 😕 2 >2??6C :?4@?D:DE6?E H:E9 E96 E96@CJ 369:?5 E96 E649?@=@8J[ E9:D 8F? 4@?EC@= >62DFC6 @?=J D6CG6D E@ 3FC56? =2H23:5:?8 8F? @H?6CD[” E96 8C@FA D2:5 😕 2 C646?E A@DE]k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Elon Musk is offering a $1 million a day to sign his PAC petition. Is that legal?

    Elon Musk is offering a $1 million a day to sign his PAC petition. Is that legal?

    [ad_1]

    Elon Musk, the billionaire founder of Tesla and SpaceX who’s gone all-in on Republican Donald Trump’s candidacy for the White House, is pledging to give away $1 million a day to voters for signing his political action committee’s petition backing the Constitution. The offer is sparking questions among election experts about the plan’s legality.

    Some experts say it is a violation of the law to link a cash handout to signing a petition that also requires a person to be registered to vote. The Justice Department didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. 

    A source familiar with Musk’s America PAC said, “The PAC is confident in the legality of this initiative and the predictable media meltdown is only helping AmericaPAC’s efforts to support President Trump.”

    Musk, the wealthiest person in the world with a fortune of $242 billion, has already committed at least $70 million to reelect the former president and is now ramping up his efforts to get voters in swing states to support Trump. The X owner had previously offered supporters $47 for each registered voter in seven battleground states that they could get to sign his petition, a nod to the fact that the winner of the November 5 election will be the nation’s 47th president.

    “Though maybe some of the other things Musk was doing were of murky legality, this one is clearly illegal,” wrote Rick Hasen, a UCLA Law School political science professor, at the Election Law Blog, about the $1 million per-day giveaway.

    He pointed to a law that prohibits paying people for registering to vote or for voting. 

    “The problem is that the only people eligible to participate in this giveaway are the people who are registered to vote. And that makes it illegal,” Hasen said in a telephone interview.

    Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, the state’s former attorney general, expressed concern about Musk’s $1 million give-away plan on Sunday.

    “I think there are real questions with how he is spending money in this race, how the dark money is flowing, not just into Pennsylvania, but apparently now into the pockets of Pennsylvanians. That is deeply concerning,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

    Elon Musk’s PAC petition

    Musk promised on Saturday that he would give away $1 million a day, until the Nov. 5 election, for people signing his PAC’s petition supporting the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech, and the Second Amendment, with its right “to keep and bear arms.” 

    He awarded a check during an event Saturday in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to a man identified as John Dreher. A message left with a number listed for Dreher was not returned Sunday. Musk gave out another check Sunday.

    Musk’s America PAC has launched a tour of Pennsylvania, a critical election battleground. He’s aiming to register voters in support of Trump, whom Musk has endorsed. The PAC is also pushing to persuade voters in other key states.

    Trump, who was campaigning Sunday in Pennsylvania, was asked about Musk’s giveaway, and said, “I haven’t followed that.” Trump said he “speaks to Elon a lot. He’s a friend of mine” and called him great for the country.

    Legal issues with Musk’s $1 million giveaway

    Among the election law experts who are raising red flags about the giveaway is Brendan Fischer, a campaign finance lawyer, who noted the latest iteration of Musk’s giveaway approaches a legal boundary. 

    That’s because the PAC is requiring registration as a prerequisite to become eligible for the $1 million check. “There would be few doubts about the legality if every Pennsylvania-based petition signer were eligible, but conditioning the payments on registration arguably violates the law,” Fischer said in an email.

    Michael Kang, an election law professor at Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law, said the context of the giveaway so close to Election Day makes it harder to make the case that the effort is anything but a incentivizing people to register to vote.

    “It’s not quite the same as paying someone to vote, but you’re getting close enough that we worry about its legality,” Kang said.

    Typically coordination between campaigns and so-called super PACs had been forbidden. But a recent opinion by the Federal Election Commissioner, which regulates federal campaigns, permitted candidates and these groups to work together in certain cases, including getting out the vote efforts.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Masked man fires gun inside bank, narrowly missing teller, and flees with $31,000

    Masked man fires gun inside bank, narrowly missing teller, and flees with $31,000

    [ad_1]

    Authorities are searching for a masked bandit who shot at a bank teller in Lake Forest before making off with $31,000.

    The man entered a Chase Bank branch around noon Thursday, reached over the counter and fired a round in the direction of the teller’s feet, according to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department. The bullet did not strike the teller.

    The suspect fled the bank, near the intersection of Portola and Bake parkways, before deputies arrived. Sheriff’s officials described him as being between 5 feet 6 inches and 5 feet 10 inches tall with a thin build. He wore a camouflage print bucket hat, a black mask that covered his entire face, a yellow hooded sweatshirt, tan pants, gloves and was armed with a silver revolver, according to the Sheriff’s Department.

    Deputies searched the surrounding neighborhood using a patrol helicopter and K-9 units, but could not find the man. Authorities collected several items from a trail near the bank that they say may be connected to the robbery. Officials did not specify what potential evidence was found.

    Foothill Ranch Elementary School, located nearby, was temporarily placed on lockdown as deputies combed the area.

    Anyone with information is asked to contact the Orange County Sheriff’s Department at (714) 647-7000 or leave an anonymous tip at (855) 847-6227.

    [ad_2]

    Clara Harter

    Source link

  • 15-Year-Old Jones High Student Charged for Bringing Gun to Orlando School

    15-Year-Old Jones High Student Charged for Bringing Gun to Orlando School

    [ad_1]

    A 15-year-old Jones High student was charged for bringing a gun to an Orlando school.

    The Orlando Police Department said it will not hesitate to protect the students and teachers they serve and take all threats seriously.

    After a social media post was shared about a student with a gun at Jones High School, a 15-year-old was swiftly located by the School Resource Officers on campus.

    The student was found with an unloaded BB gun. However, it did not have any markings to distinguish it from a real firearm, according to local law enforcement.

    While there was no threat associated with his social media post, the actions of this student caused unnecessary fear among his peers, their parents and teachers.

    The student was charged with a city ordinance violation: Carrying a Simulated Firearm.

    In light of the recent school shooting in Georgia, the Orlando Police Department expressed its unwavering commitment to vigilance in local schools and to stop any individuals who could be considered a danger to public safety.

    Recently, a 16-year-old Central Florida student was also arrested for threatening a mass shooting at another local school; a 15-year-old Central Florida student was also arrested for making an online school shooting threat at another school; and a 13-year-old student was also arrested for threatening a school shooting in Central Florida.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 9th Circuit upholds California gun bans in some ‘sensitive’ places, but not others

    9th Circuit upholds California gun bans in some ‘sensitive’ places, but not others

    [ad_1]

    California may enforce its recent ban on guns in “sensitive places” when it comes to parks and playgrounds, bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, casinos, stadiums, amusement parks, zoos, libraries, museums, athletic facilities and the parking areas associated with them, a federal appellate court ruled Friday.

    However, the state may not enforce similar restrictions in hospitals or other medical facilities, on public transit, at places of worship or financial institutions, or in the parking areas associated with or shared by those places, the three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals determined.

    It also may not enforce its ban on guns at all events requiring a permit, or on visitors carrying guns onto any private property where the owner has not posted signs explicitly allowing them, the panel ruled.

    The appellate panel — which simultaneously issued similar findings relating to laws in Hawaii — issued its ruling in response to broad injunctions by lower courts that had blocked the bans from taking effect amid ongoing litigation over the laws.

    The panel noted that some locations where it rejected statewide bans, such as banks and churches, could still bar visitors from carrying guns based on existing property laws, but the state governments could not unilaterally and universally do so for them. It said owners of private property are similarly free to ban firearms on their property.

    “For the places where we hold that the states likely may not prohibit the carry of firearms, the practical effect of our ruling is merely that private-property owners may choose to allow the carry of firearms,” Circuit Judge Susan P. Graber wrote for the panel. “Owners of hospitals, banks and churches, for example, remain free to ban firearms at those locations.”

    Gov. Gavin Newsom claimed partial victory — and said the state would continue fighting to drive down gun violence.

    “We refuse to accept shootings at schools, parks and concerts as a normal fact of life. While we fought for the court to go further, today’s ruling affirms our state’s authority to limit guns in many public places,” Newsom said in a statement. “California will continue to take action to protect our residents, and defend our nation-leading, life-saving gun laws from an extreme gun lobby and politicians in their pockets.”

    Gun advocates characterized the ruling as a partial win, as well.

    “This partially favorable decision from the Ninth Circuit shows how far we’ve come over the past decade. But this case, and our work to restore the right to bear arms, is far from over,” said Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition, which helped bring the challenge against the laws. “FPC will continue to fight forward until all peaceable people can fully exercise their right to carry in California and throughout the United States.”

    Graber, an appointee of President Clinton, was joined in the decision by Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder, an appointee of President Carter; and Circuit Judge Jennifer Sung, an appointee of President Biden.

    The ruling was the latest to apply the historical test for gun laws set out in 2022 by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. vs. Bruen. There, the high court said that gun laws are legitimate only if they are rooted in the nation’s history and tradition or sufficiently analogous to some historical law.

    Graber’s opinion parsed through an array of historical laws to determine whether lower court injunctions blocking many of the states’ bans on guns in sensitive places should stand, or if they should be reversed based on historical precedent.

    In doing so, the ruling divided public places into those where guns may be banned, such as parks; and those where they may not be based on a lack of similar restrictions in the past, such as places of worship.

    That partition highlighted a reality under Bruen’s “history and tradition” test that gun control advocates have denounced as preposterous: that it precludes leaders from crafting modern gun laws to address modern realities of gun violence, such as mass shootings at places of worship.

    Billy Clark, senior litigation attorney at the gun control advocacy group Giffords Law Center, said the decision “further illustrates that it is constitutional to keep guns out of sensitive places” — but also more evidence of the “chaos” in 2nd Amendment law caused by the Bruen decision.

    Janet Carter, senior director of issues and appeals at the gun control group Everytown Law, said her group didn’t agree with all aspects of the decision, but still found it “heartening.”

    “Keeping guns out of sensitive places is common sense and these laws are crucial to keeping our communities safe from gun violence,” Carter said.

    Adam Kraut, executive director of the gun rights advocacy group Second Amendment Foundation, said California’s expansion of “sensitive places” where guns are banned “goes beyond what the Supreme Court contemplated when it mentioned them in Bruen,” and said his group will continue to fight such bans in court.

    [ad_2]

    Kevin Rector

    Source link

  • Christopher Dorner gun found at Airbnb of alleged ‘crime tourists’ after Beverly Hills robbery of $1 million watch

    Christopher Dorner gun found at Airbnb of alleged ‘crime tourists’ after Beverly Hills robbery of $1 million watch

    [ad_1]

    A gun once registered to Christopher Dorner — the notorious former L.A. cop who killed four people including two law officers — was found in the L.A. Airbnb of a pair of alleged “crime tourists,” federal prosecutors say.

    The two South American nationals are accused of stealing a $1-million watch at gunpoint last week on the patio of the Beverly Wilshire hotel.

    Did they use Dorner’s gun to carry out the alleged crime?

    Assistant U.S. Atty. Jena MacCabe would not confirm the weapon was used in the alleged robbery, KCAL reported, but an affidavit says it was the only weapon found in connection with the arrests.

    “We’re still trying to figure it out,” MacCabe said.

    Prosecutors say the suspects held up the victim in front of his wife and twin 5-year-old daughters at the high-end Beverly Hills hotel. One held a gun while the other took off the man’s luxury watch, a Patek Philippe, then fled in a car with a stolen plate, the affidavit says.

    Street cameras near the Beverly Wilshire captured the Aug. 7 armed robbery of a man in front of his family.

    (U.S. District Court)

    Jamer Mauricio Sepulveda Salazar, 21, of Colombia, is charged with two felony counts related to the armed robbery. Nineteen-year-old Jesus Eduardo Padron Rojas, of Venezuela, is charged with felony conspiracy to commit robbery.

    Sepulveda said the crew had been doing surveillance for two weeks in an effort to steal a Patek Phillipe watch, the complaint says, and both men admitted their involvement in stealing a $30,000 Rolex in Beverly Hills two days before the $1-million watch theft.

    Investigators found a handgun in Padron’s pillowcase at the suspects’ Airbnb on Browning Boulevard in Los Angeles. The gun was registered to Dorner, a former officer who targeted LAPD officers who he felt had wronged him.

    Over nine days in 2013, Dorner killed four people — two police officers, the daughter of a former LAPD captain and her fiancé — and injured three others. He died in a cabin in Big Bear that went up in flames after a shootout with authorities.

    MacCabe said investigators were “trying to figure out how this gun from so long ago, somehow came into their possession and was tied up in this violent armed robbery series.”

    [ad_2]

    Sandra McDonald

    Source link

  • USC student found seriously injured in downtown L.A. apartment after attack, sources say

    USC student found seriously injured in downtown L.A. apartment after attack, sources say

    [ad_1]

    A 21-year-old USC student was found seriously injured Tuesday evening inside her apartment in downtown Los Angeles. Los Angeles police say she was the victim of an apparent attack.

    The young woman was found at about 10 p.m. in an upscale apartment building in the 1200 block of Hill Street. She was taken to a hospital, where she was in critical condition, according to L.A. police Capt. Kelly Muniz.

    The incident is under investigation by the L.A. Police Department. Law enforcement sources familiar with the investigation said the woman’s parents had become concerned after not hearing from her. She was discovered by a family member who had gone to check on her. The sources, who were not allowed to speak publicly about the investigation, described the woman as having a head injury and suffering from trauma.

    Investigators are conducting a forensic scrub of the apartment as well as talking to neighbors and checking surrounding video security systems.

    Authorities did not say whether there were any signs of forced entry.

    The building was described as a well-secured, modern apartment complex where a one-bedroom unit rents for $2,600 a month.

    Anyone with information related to the attack is asked to contact detectives at (213) 996-4104 or (213) 996-4150.

    [ad_2]

    Richard Winton

    Source link

  • Can you have a gun in your car without a concealed carry permit? What NC law says

    Can you have a gun in your car without a concealed carry permit? What NC law says

    [ad_1]

    Open carry is legal in North Carolina without a permit if you are at least 18 years old and have no felony convictions, according to Raleigh-based Manning Law Firm.

    Open carry is legal in North Carolina without a permit if you are at least 18 years old and have no felony convictions, according to Raleigh-based Manning Law Firm.

    The Kansas City Star

    Concealed carry permits allow North Carolina residents to transport firearms on their person and in their vehicles. But what if you don’t have a permit?

    Open carry is legal in North Carolina without a permit if you are at least 18 years old and have no felony convictions, according to Raleigh-based Manning Law Firm.

    State law also includes rules on driving with a firearm in your vehicle without a permit. Here’s what to know about open carry while traveling in North Carolina.

    Can you open carry in your vehicle in NC?

    North Carolina law allows gun owners without concealed carry permits to transport firearms in their vehicles, but the weapons must be displayed openly, visible and readily seen, according to Charlotte-based law firm Randall & Stump.

    However, state law allows those without concealed carry permits to store weapons in the trunk, since they wouldn’t be within reach of anyone in the vehicle.

    “If you’re driving a vehicle with access to the trunk area, like an SUV or van, your weapon must be securely locked away in a container,” the firm says.

    What is the penalty for concealing a gun inside a vehicle in NC?

    First-time offenders convicted of illegally concealing a weapon without a permit could be charged with a Class 2 misdemeanor, which comes with up to 60 days in jail and a fine, according to Randall & Stump.

    Any subsequent offense could result in a felony conviction, punishable by up to 39 months in prison depending on criminal history, the firm says.

    Can you fly with a gun in NC?

    People over the age of 18 can fly with firearms and ammunition, but they must be unloaded and in a locked, hard-sided container. They can only be transported in checked baggage, according to the Transportation Security Administration.

    Gun owners must also declare their firearms or ammunition when checking their bags at the ticket counter, the TSA says.

    What is the penalty for carrying a loaded gun through TSA?

    If TSA finds you have a loaded gun in the airport, “you will be charged with a crime and face civil fines,” says law firm Randall & Stump.

    “Also, if you have an unloaded gun that is not stored and transported properly, you will face charges and civil fines.”

    Attempting to transport a gun through a TSA checkpoint could lead to thousands of dollars in fines, the firm says.

    Fines range from a few hundred dollars for BB guns and flare pistols to nearly $10,000 for any type of loaded firearm (or unloaded with accessible ammunition).

    You could also be fined between $650 and $2,610 for firearms that are not stored properly inside your luggage.

    Ask the North Carolina Service Journalism Team

    Have a question about your community you’d like answered? Or maybe a tip or story idea you’d like to share? The service journalism teams at The News & Observer and The Charlotte Observer want to hear from you.

    Related stories from Charlotte Observer

    Evan Moore is a service journalism reporter for the Charlotte Observer. He grew up in Denver, North Carolina, where he previously worked as a reporter for the Denver Citizen, and is a UNC Charlotte graduate.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump shooting shocks, but a gunman striking terror in the U.S. is nothing new. Now what?

    Trump shooting shocks, but a gunman striking terror in the U.S. is nothing new. Now what?

    [ad_1]

    The attempt on former President Trump’s life at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania on Saturday felt familiar in a uniquely American way.

    The shooter trained his AR-style rifle on people gathered far from his rooftop perch, echoing the mass shooting in 2017 in which a gunman opened fire on a music festival from the 32nd floor of a Las Vegas hotel.

    Law enforcement said the shooter was 20 years old and got the gun he used from home — just like so many other young shooters who have left bloody trails through this nation’s schools and churches, bars and other community gathering places.

    “Time and time again our communities are shaken by acts of gun violence that have invaded what should be our safe places,” said Angela Ferrell-Zabala, executive director of the gun control advocacy organization Moms Demand Action. “But they are a consequence of our country’s weak gun laws and guns everywhere culture — laws that allow hate to be armed with a gun to easily take someone else’s life.”

    Amid denouncements of political violence from leaders and average Americans on both sides of the political aisle, the nation’s great gun divide felt newly raw Sunday — but hardly changed. Despite their presidential candidate nearly being shot dead, there were no outward calls from leading Republicans for the party to ease its ardent support of gun rights.

    Still, the shooting provided a new and particularly powerful example of yet another American institution — this time the electoral process — falling victim to the vast proliferation of modern firearms. And that could matter as courts across the country and in California continue to weigh when, where and why such weapons may be restricted, if at all.

    Right now, federal courts are considering challenges to a California law banning exactly the sort of AR-style rifle used by the alleged shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, of Bethel Park, Pa.; another banning people Crooks’ age and younger from possessing firearms; and a third barring people from carrying firearms into an array of “sensitive” places — including public gatherings and special events.

    A person is removed by state police from the stands after a gun was fired at Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in Butler, Pa., on Saturday.

    (Rebecca Droke/AFP via Getty Images)

    Like the Vegas shooting, where a gunman killed almost 60 people and injured hundreds of others, the attack Saturday raised questions about how to define such sensitive places, and how to determine whether a certain type of firearm or accessory is so dangerous that it falls outside the protections of the 2nd Amendment, legal experts said.

    Such questions hold added weight in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. vs. Bruen, where the high court said most gun laws are legitimate only if they are rooted in the nation’s history and tradition or are sufficiently analogous to some historic law.

    In October, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, of San Diego, citing the high court’s Bruen decision, ruled that California’s ban on the sort of AR-style weapon used Saturday was unconstitutional because it was not rooted in history — and because assault-style rifles are sufficiently common and not uniquely dangerous.

    “Like the Bowie Knife which was commonly carried by citizens and soldiers in the 1800s,” Benitez wrote at the start of his decision, “ ‘assault weapons’ are dangerous, but useful.”

    Of course, assault rifles are far more dangerous than Bowie knives, with a vastly different range for inflicting harm. Federal authorities, for example, said Crooks shot Trump from an “elevated position outside of the rally venue” — which the Washington Post estimated was about 430 feet from where Trump was speaking.

    Darrell A.H. Miller, a professor at University of Chicago Law School who studies 2nd Amendment law, said there is a “fairly well established” legal tradition declaring political rallies and other electoral events as sensitive places where guns can be prohibited.

    However, Saturday’s shooting raised new questions about the scope of such restrictions and others like it — and about the nature of “sensitive places” and how their boundaries can and should be defined, he and other experts said.

    “Sensitive places doctrine, to the extent that it is currently being developed, may need to be attentive to changes in firearm technology over the last 200 years,” Miller said in an interview Sunday.

    Legal experts said the shooting could also help gun control advocates argue that such high-powered, long-range weapons are uniquely dangerous, even if they are commonly owned, and that bans on them in California and elsewhere are therefore in line with other longstanding bans on particularly dangerous weapons such as machine guns.

    Steve Gordon, a retired LAPD special weapons team officer and sniper, said the shot that struck Trump was not particularly difficult with a little training, despite the distance.

    “That type of rifle is standard issue to the police/military and that is not a difficult shot to make with that weapon system,” Gordon told The Times.

    Congressional Republicans and the Biden administration have said Saturday’s shooting will be investigated thoroughly, including to determine if anything could have been done differently to prevent it. What may come of those probes is unclear.

    Trump’s shooting also could be cited as another data point — a historically monumental one — in support of laws, such as California’s, that bar the sale of such weapons to those under 21, regardless of whether Crooks personally bought the weapon or not.

    Gun control advocates could use the added evidence of the unique threat that high-powered, long-range weapons pose in the hands of unstable young men, particularly given the uphill battle they face in defending firearms restrictions post-Bruen.

    The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that domestic abusers can be precluded from possessing firearms, but it has ruled against firearms regulations in other instances. Just last month, the high court struck down a federal ban on bump stocks — an accessory that allows gunmen to fire off rounds much more rapidly, and which were used in the Vegas shooting.

    Courts aside, Trump’s shooting has already entered the national gun debate in a major way.

    For example, when the National Rifle Assn. offered prayers to Trump, law enforcement and others at the rally in a post on the social media platform X, Shannon Watts — a co-founder of Moms Demand Action and the affiliated group Everytown — responded with a bristling retort suggesting hypocrisy on the NRA’s part.

    “The NRA’s extremist agenda ensured a 20 year old would-be assassin had access to a weapon of war, rendering even the most highly trained security forces incapable of protecting anyone — from school children to former presidents,” Watts wrote.

    She then noted that such weapons have been used in recent years to murder people at a grocery store in Buffalo, N.Y., a nightclub in Orlando, Fla., and schools across the country, from Santa Fe, N.M., to Uvalde, Texas, to Parkland, Fla.

    Others made similar connections.

    “If you keep talking about the assassination attempt don’t you dare tell the kids who survive school shootings and their families to ‘just get over it,’ ” wrote David Hogg, a survivor of the shooting that killed 17 and wounded others at his Parkland high school in 2018.

    Hogg was apparently referring to comments Trump made about the need to “get over” a school shooting in Iowa earlier this year, which were roundly condemned by gun control advocates and survivors.

    What happened Saturday was “unacceptable,” Hogg wrote, but so is “what happens every day to kids who aren’t the president and don’t survive.”

    Times staff writer Richard Winton contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Kevin Rector

    Source link