|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
[Craving even more FPM content? Sign up for FPM+ to unlock exclusive series, virtual town-halls with our authors, and more. Click here to sign up.]
In the season opener of Monday Night Football, the San Francisco 49ers defeated the New York Jets 32-19. Fans were eager to see the 49ers first-round draft pick Ricky Pearsall, known for spectacular one-hand catches as a collegian. The talented rookie did not take part in the game, and he was fortunate just to be alive.
Back on August 31, Pearsall was making his way through San Francisco’s Union Square when an armed robber demanded his watch, reportedly a Rolex. Pearsall refused to give it up and in the ensuing struggle the robber shot Pearsall in the chest. Miraculously the bullet hit no vital organs and passed out his back. Pearsall wondered aloud if he was going to die, but he managed to walk to the ambulance and remained in serious but stable condition. Fans wanted to know who had shot the receiver, but that was a tough call.
Police chased down the robber, reportedly wounded in the fight. In early reports, the shooter was described as a 17-year-old “boy,” a high-school senior from Tracy, California, some 70 miles inland. The suspect said he was “very sorry this did happen,” but the speaker was court-appointed attorney Bob Dunlap, who said the shooting was “completely out of character for him,” while confirming that the teen had another “outstanding matter” in San Joaquin County, whose cities include Tracy and Stockton. The “matter” was not revealed and neither was the suspect’s identity.
His name was withheld because he was a minor, a stark contrast to Georgia school shooter Colt Gray, only 14, whose photograph quickly appeared. No photos of Pearsall’s shooter made the news, and a cartoonish courtroom sketch portrays him with light brown hair, beard and pony tail, in the style of a California surfer or skateboarder.
A woman described as the shooter’s mother, also unnamed, needed a Spanish interpreter to follow the proceedings. Members of Ricky Pearsall’s family, who were also in court, have a right to wonder if the shooter is legally present in the United States. As they should know, California’s sanctuary law protects criminal illegals from deportation.
In 2014 Mexican national Luis Bracamontes gunned down Sacramento police officers Danny Oliver and Michael Davis. California attorney general Kamala Harris offered condolences to the families of Oliver and Davis but failed to name their killer or denounce the murders as “gun violence.” In similar style in 2015, Harris failed to condemn Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik for the murder of 14 Americans of diverse ethnicities, failed to call the mass murder a hate crime or gun violence, and failed to name a single victim.
On July 1, 2015 on a San Francisco pier, a repeatedly deported Mexican criminal calling himself Jose Ines Garcia Zarate fired a shot that claimed the life of Kate Steinle. It’s hard to find any statement on the killing of Steinle from attorney general Kamala Harris, previously a district attorney in San Francisco.
On December 25, 2018, a Mexican criminal calling himself Gustavo Perez Arriaga gunned down Newman, California, police officer Ronil Singh, a legal immigrant from Fiji who came to the United States to become a police officer. U.S. Senator Kamala Harris failed to condemn the murder as “gun violence.” The same held true in 2019 when two Mexican nationals illegally present in the United States, gunned down police officer Brian Ishmael in California’s El Dorado County. As the people should know, California also offers special protection to juvenile criminals.
If he is indeed 17, the “high-school senior” who shot Pearsall can’t legally own a gun, so California’s myriad gun laws did not prevent this juvenile from acquiring a “semi-automatic firearm.” The unnamed “high-school senior” has been charged with attempted murder, assault with a firearm and attempted second-degree robbery, but his prosecution faces an obstacle.
Under California’s 2016 Proposition 57, the decision to move the case to adult court must be made by juvenile court judges, not prosecutors. To try this shooter as an adult is a no-brainer, but California law is very kind to criminals. Under the 2016 Proposition 57, the decision to move the case to adult court must be made by juvenile court judges, not prosecutors like San Francisco district attorney Brooke Jenkins, who defeated the pro-criminal Chesa Boudin in 2022. When it comes to leniency for juvenile criminals, Proposition 57 is not the only game in town.
Senate Bill 1391, signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2019, bars all prosecution of those under age 16 in adult court. As a result, any criminal under age 16 could murder the entire San Francisco 49ers team, be tried only in juvenile court, serve time in a juvenile prison, and gain release at age 25. In his signing message, Brown touted “a more just system that respects victims, protects public safety, holds youth accountable,” and so on.
Meanwhile, if Pearsall’s watch had been worth less than $950 and the thief had stolen it out of his car, the theft would only be a misdemeanor, not a felony. That is due to the 2014 Proposition 47, the “Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act,” so named by then attorney general Kamala Harris.
At this writing, Kamala Harris and former San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom have not denounced the shooting of Ricky Pearsall as “gun violence.” The San Francisco Democrats have transformed the Golden State into a haven for criminals and a danger zone for the people.
When youths do a adult Crime they need to do the same time in prison of something that will scare the life out of them
Awww, leave the poor Hispanic alone. ~
EIGHT DOWNVOTES❗
EIGHT❗
Is there no-one left who understands satire?
Perhaps I am too cool for school …
Maybe you should give up on satire. If you have to tell us how great your satire is maybe it isn’t.
Personally I find you uniquely unfunny.
As someone who has made many attempts at humor, I can tell you that you’re in trouble the moment you have to explain a joke. Recommended for the stout of heart only. Take it from Steve Martin: “Comedy isn’t pretty.”
Indeed. I both angered and disappointed some conservatives on Twitter by calling Code Pink “Twitter Bots”.
They are real, they aren’t bots!
I had to explain that Code Pink Are “twitter bots” because of their “cunning stunts” … And got back “they are not bots, and they are too stupid to be cunning.”
______
Exasperated, I asked if anyone was aware of the difference between a lawyer and a bantam rooster? …
“A rooster clucks defiance.” Likewise, Code Pink are “twitter bots”.
———
The very few who finally grasped the point reported me.
———
Conservative? They thought of themselves that way.
Nah. You are not “too cool for school”, you are just “cool”.
That satire is about as subtle as a cncrete cinder block smacked up against your head.
Tragedy and farce and tragedy and farce–back and forth in a one-party people’s republic.
Scott Adams was spot on with his comments about what you need to do to protect you and your loved ones. For his advice, he has been branded a racist. and demonized.
Another piece of garbage is the public defender.
Let him take the shooter to live in his home.
“Completely out of character for him.” My fat white a**!
So, a 17-year-old in San Francisco procured a firearm and attempted to steal a rolex. Let me see, the last time I tried to buy a gun in California, I needed to produce a RealID (either DL or passport) and wait two weeks to pick it up. Gee, did this kid wait two weeks? Of course not. So, if gun control laws are sooo effective in California, why is a 49er is recovering from a gunshot wound? Let’s hear it for gun laws! Yay!! And vote for Kamala —- NOT!!
Mr. Billingsly, you used the term”gun violence” a number of times in this report. PLEASE do not use this term in this manner. Violence is violence, whether the insrument used is find, boot, large athletic sock foull of two inch drainrock, a jacknife, kitchen knife, heavy suitcase, or a firearm. It is ALL vioence against another human. The “left” are working hard to get the gun to be reviled because of its frequent use as a weapon of death or threat of death. that the Left love to villify that particular implement, thus “justifying” the disarming of you and me.
California and Federal law prohibit the possession in ublicof ANY firearm by one under 18 years of age, and in particular handguns. Thus thus guy committed a federal felony for mere possession in public, unsupervised. It is also a felony to use any firearm to threaten or intimidate a putative victim, in what in this instance constitutes an armed robbery attempt. The fact it appears to have been unsiccessful does not lessen the crime.
Have the BATF run a race on this handgun to attempt to identify the most recent purchase of this weapon, or whether it was reported stolen? If no why not? Thus underage kid could NOT have legally purchased that handgun anywhere in the US. That means it was either stolen or supplied him by another felon.
If asked, I wonder what response the vitcim would make for an explanation of why HE was not armed. If it was California’s insane laws prohibiting or making near impossible his being armed, then this crime falls diresctly upon the State.
Friend of mine used to live in Berserkeley, tried to get a concealed carry permit but was denied.Even though he was a licensed Private Invesigator he could not fulfill the “justifiable need” requirement. He now resides in Vermont. No Mother May I Card needed. Want to carry a gun> Crry gun.
In order for a crime to be acknowledged by the known D politicians and covered by the fake news media it has to be in compliance with the narrative.
In order of importance – the first two items are…
skin color and race of the victim
skin color and race of the perpetrator of the crime
If both conditions are not in compliance with the narrative – bury the story – it can’t be acknowledged or reported.