Image 01 Image 03

Los Angeles DA’s Husband Charged For Pointing Gun At BLM Protesters At His Doorstep

Los Angeles DA’s Husband Charged For Pointing Gun At BLM Protesters At His Doorstep

“protesters affiliated with Black Lives Matter L.A. and other local organizations descended on the Laceys’ Granada Hills home for a predawn protest. The group had banged on drums and gathered in the street before three of them approached Lacey’s home and knocked on the door.”

At approximately 5:30 a.m. on March 2, 2020, about 30 members of Black Lives Matter showed up at the door of Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey’s home demanding that she take a meeting with them.  Needless to say, her husband was not amused.

Rather, he was alarmed and clearly upset and threatened the group with a gun before turning back into his home and slamming the door with the statement that he was calling the police.

Watch (via Twitchy):

Obviously, there was no “community meeting” scheduled with the DA at 5:30 in the morning at her home.  Instead, they decided to show up at her home because they allege they could not obtain an actual appointment via her office.

Apparently, not being able to obtain a scheduled meeting is reason enough to show up at someone’s residence in the early hours of the morning, with thirty people no less, and demand a meeting.

Lacey’s husband has now been charged with three misdemeanor charges for assault with a firearm.

The Los Angeles Times reports (archive link):

The husband of Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Jackie Lacey has been charged with multiple counts of assault in connection with a March incident recorded on video in which he waved a gun at protesters outside the couple’s Granada Hills home, according to court filings made public Tuesday.

The California attorney general’s office filed three counts of misdemeanor assault with a firearm against David Lacey on Monday, records show. Lacey had been under investigation for several months after video surfaced of him brandishing a handgun on his doorstep on March 2.

An arraignment is scheduled for Aug.13, the attorney general’s office said. David Lacey is not currently in police custody, a representative for the district attorney’s reelection campaign said.

Apparently, the pre-dawn, on-the-spot meeting demand was accompanied by the banging of drums and followed a contentious reelection campaign in which Lacey had allegedly received death threats.

The LA Times continues:

The chaotic scene, much of which was captured in cellphone video, unfolded when protesters affiliated with Black Lives Matter L.A. and other local organizations descended on the Laceys’ Granada Hills home for a predawn protest. The group had banged on drums and gathered in the street before three of them approached Lacey’s home and knocked on the door.

Footage shows David Lacey open the door and point a handgun in the direction of the protesters.

“I will shoot you. Get off of my porch,” he said in the video.

. . . . At a news conference after the incident, Jackie Lacey apologized and said her husband was reacting in fear, as she had received death threats during a contentious reelection campaign. Lacey will face former San Francisco Dist. Atty. George Gascón in the November general election.

In a statement Tuesday, Lacey again cited the vitriolic campaign as a reason for her husband to be worried about their safety.

“The events that took place earlier this year have caused my family immense pain. My husband acted in fear for my safety after we were subjected to months of harassment that included a death threat no less than a week earlier,” she said. “Protesters arrived at my house shortly after 5 a.m. while I was upstairs. My husband felt that we were in danger and acted out of genuine concern for our well-being.”

The protesters’ attorneys dismiss the argument that the couple felt threatened because thirty BLM protesters showed up at their home at 5:30 a.m., stating the Laceys could see from their video security cam that the protestors who approached their door were not armed.

David Lacey’s defense attorney, Samuel Tyre, said his “client’s human instinct is forever and always to protect his wife and his family and to keep them safe from physical harm.” He declined to comment on the facts of the case.

Carl Douglas, the civil rights attorney representing Abdullah and two other protesters named in the complaint, described the Laceys’ explanation that they were in fear for their lives as “laughable.” He said that the Laceys’ home has a doorbell equipped with a camera that would have made clear the protesters at their doorstep were unarmed.

“Rarely, in 40 years of toiling in this space, have I ever been so pleasantly surprised to see justice in action, that [Atty. Gen.] Xavier Becerra and his team would understand the wrongfulness and the maliciousness of David Lacey pulling a handgun on peaceful protesters,” he said.

Abdullah said she was thankful for Becerra’s decision, but also questioned why felony charges weren’t filed, suggesting David Lacey was given preferential treatment due to his status. Abdullah also scoffed at the idea that the Laceys felt threatened, noting that Jackie Lacey was familiar with her and the other two protesters at the door.

This is California, so there is unlikely to be anyone stepping in to restore sanity as happened in Missouri.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Leftist autophagy is fun to watch.

2smartforlibs | August 6, 2020 at 9:07 am

For one thing you stole what you have and they were just there to take it back. Remember the liberal playbook. You know you didn’t build that and every other cliche the left beat to death.

” . . . At a news conference after the incident, Jackie Lacey apologized … ”


texansamurai | August 6, 2020 at 9:24 am

don’t really care who the guy(or his wife) happens to be–you show-up with 25-30 of your ” comrades, ” go through a bit of drum banging/theatre then pound on the door in the pitch dark and you’re pretty damned certain to get confronted with lethal force by the owner/occupants(particularly if defending their loved ones)–would have likely done the same thing(though not with a handgun)–what this is really about is that blm/antifa/fascists are ” entitled ” to threaten you/your family/your property at their whim and YOU DO NOT have the right to defend yourself/your family/your loved ones in your own home/property without being charged


The Friendly Grizzly | August 6, 2020 at 9:31 am

Nothing will come of this. He’s connected.

the only thing i would have done different than this guy?
i would have pulled the trigger!
BTW does this mean his wife filed charges against her own husband?

    No, I would have started with my finger off the trigger. Doesn’t anyone learn basic gun safety anymore?

    “Carl Douglas, the civil rights attorney representing Abdullah and two other protesters named in the complaint, described the Laceys’ explanation that they were in fear for their lives as “laughable.” He said that the Laceys’ home has a doorbell equipped with a camera that would have made clear the protesters at their doorstep were unarmed.”

    Who cares if they were potentially unarmed?

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Obie1. | August 6, 2020 at 10:10 am

      Watch any cop show. NONE of the actors have been taught trigger discipline. Then again, maybe some LEOs haven’t either. I may have downticked you. I was aiming for Reply.

      Edward in reply to Obie1. | August 6, 2020 at 10:35 am

      I guess Douglas believes that doorbell camera has X-Ray technology, and maybe a magnetometer capability also, so that it would reveal not only openly carried firearms, but concealed firearms also. Or maybe he never heard of concealed carry (it is LA where such licenses are only for the super rich/super connected).

      navyvet in reply to Obie1. | August 6, 2020 at 11:24 am

      Could this have been one of those “mostly peaceful” demonstrations that qualifies as such up until the moment the demonstrators pull concealed weapons?

      If I recall, only Superman had x-ray vision. Door cameras and homeowners awakened at 05:30…not so much.

      alaskabob in reply to Obie1. | August 6, 2020 at 12:07 pm

      Disparity of force. As if one person can defend themselves from a crowd barehanded. By the way Mr. Civil Rights Mouthpiece….how many unarmed mobs lynched Blacks back in the “good old days”?

      stevewhitemd in reply to Obie1. | August 6, 2020 at 12:14 pm

      Because doorbell cams are perfect, as we all know.

      And bad guys might actually show a modicum of sense and hide their weapons until they force their way inside.

      Thirty people showing up on a doorstep, banging drums and screaming insults, at 5 am is innately threatening and intimidating. THAT’S THE WHOLE POINT. That’s why they are doing it. All the rest is leftist dissembling.

      You don’t want a gun in your face? Don’t go banging drums and chanting insults at someone’s front door at the crack of dawn.

        “Thirty people showing up on a doorstep, banging drums and screaming insults, at 5 am is innately threatening and intimidating. THAT’S THE WHOLE POINT.”


          TempeJeff in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | August 8, 2020 at 12:38 pm

          Now, if they were playing kazoos, that would not be as terrifying…

          Thirty of these BLM people on anyone’s doorstep in the pre-dawn hours is terrifying. We’ve seen what they do. They can bang drums, play kazoos, or play a Heavenly harp, and they are still an ominous, unwelcome presence. Or would you be happy to find a chanting BLM mob at your door at 5:30 a.m. because you were their latest target?

      DaveGinOly in reply to Obie1. | August 6, 2020 at 7:22 pm

      I am old enough to remember when nobody taught “keep your finger off the trigger.” Not that they taught “Unholster and put your finger on the trigger.” What you were supposed to do with your trigger finger just wasn’t mentioned. OTOH, it was presumed that your finger would be on the trigger, this is why so many old-school types are still, to this day of “finger off the trigger,” opposed to “hair” triggers. Being concerned with light triggers was entirely legit back in the day. Not so much today. A trigger’s weight (within reason, say, not less than 2 lbs) isn’t a concern if your finger isn’t on it, because guns don’t go off by themselves.

      If this man is untrained, of if he had training back in the day, it’s not surprising that his finger was on the trigger.

        RasMoyag in reply to DaveGinOly. | August 7, 2020 at 1:15 pm

        I learned that you don’t pull your gun unless you are going to use it. That’s just backwoods West Virginia upbringing. And a group of people banging on our door in the night would probably have got shot through the door. Of course, they would have known that was the likely outcome too.

    Colonel Travis in reply to [email protected]. | August 6, 2020 at 1:31 pm

    Stop pretending like you’re in your personal version of Death Wish. Owning a gun is a serious responsibility. If you own one, get as much training as you can and know the laws of your state.

      VaGentleman in reply to Colonel Travis. | August 7, 2020 at 7:54 am

      Amen, Col. If he was so afraid, why did he open the door? The better move is to stay behind a barrier (door) and call 911. If they want to come in, make them break the door – that shows forced, violent entry into an occupied space. What he did was stupid, and exactly what they wanted him to do.

Anacleto Mitraglia | August 6, 2020 at 9:43 am

Quis custodiet custodes? Who’s gonna prosecute the prosecutors?

He’s a pretty big dude, seems like he could have come out unarmed and given that protestor a pretty good smack down. I’m pretty sure slapping a trespasser in the face is legal, even in California.

    Edward in reply to Dennis. | August 6, 2020 at 10:38 am

    But what about the other 29 “meeting attendees”?

      Dennis in reply to Edward. | August 6, 2020 at 1:29 pm

      I’m sure they would have had plenty to say, doubt they would have done anything. These are liberals, doing stuff isn’t their forte. Mostly they just complain.

        DaveGinOly in reply to Dennis. | August 6, 2020 at 7:25 pm

        Although I’d generally agree, we’ve recently had “protesters” not known to be armed suddenly produce weapons during incidents. These people are unhinged. You can’t be sure they’re not armed just because you can’t see any weapons. If I’m on this guy’s jury (should it go so far), there’s no way I’d convict.

“He said that the Laceys’ home has a doorbell equipped with a camera that would have made clear the protesters at their doorstep were unarmed.”

When I was thirteen three other “yutes” whom I was not on good terms with once showed up on my parents’ doorstep. Had there been a camera all it would have shown was me answering the door, then a couple seconds later two of the three running as I came out holding a ~3’ metal rod. It would not have shown the knife I’d spotted tucked up under the sleeve of one of the two who ran.

These people showed up thirty strong at the ass crack of dawn as a show of force – both the numbers and the timing communicate that. There was no way for the husband to know what that many people may have had hidden on their persons, nor how far they were ready to escalate matters.

Lacey is facing a well-funded campaign by a Soros-picked challenger. With all of the corruption permeating all levels of government in LA, I’m surprised Soros doesn’t already own LA.

BTW, all LA County voters will receive mail-in ballots. All of us. Dead people, people who have already fled, dogs, cats, felons, illegal aliens, space aliens, distant shadows, cartoon characters,…

Life in the People’s Democratic Republic of California. A black man is being charged with a crime after he and his wife threatened in the dead of night by a white-run group modeled after the KKK (preaches racial supremacy, wears coverings to conceal identity, kills, burns property, loots, engages in racially-motivated terrorism and violence).

You bein disrespectful, Mr. David Lacey? Is you? Doncha ya know yer place, Mr. David Lacey? Best to keep yo head down and yo mind on yo work here on the Communist Plantation! And tell yo wench to shut her big disrespectful mouth!

I pray that Mr. David Lacey walks, and that his 2d Amendment rights are vindicated in the courts.

    He is being charged by the CA Attorney General’s office because the commies don’t the LA County DA’s office will file anything before the election (there is nothing to charge for anyway).

    I expect these charges to be dropped after the elections which I expect she will win. If not, Trump better win so the DOJ can step in. There are serious basic constitutional civil rights issues here.

I wonder if Carl Douglas had a bunch of protesters at his home at 5:30 AM would be able to see that they were unarmed through his doorbell. 30 people deep? No way to tell who is armed or unarmed. By the way, were any of the protesters cited for disturbing the peace or trespassing? I’ll bet there’s a noise ordinance in LA that prohibits lawnmowers from being operated until 8:00A.M.

    That’s different because reasons. Also because Black Lives Matter except when they don’t. Also because global warming. Also because shut up.

    scooterjay in reply to dr. frank. | August 6, 2020 at 11:00 am

    If anyone should understand the threat of violence it should be Carl Douglas. I’m sure the crowd was Kung Fu fighting, those kids were fast as lightning. All though it was done with expert timing and appeared to be very exciting, it was indeed a little bit frightening. Oh oh whoa oh oooh! When the big boss showed up several participants were overheard saying “Hoo ha, let’s get it on!”

AlexanderYpsilantis | August 6, 2020 at 10:45 am

Charged for defending your home, property and family from a threatening mob? This strikes at the core of our Constitutionally described Rights. Shameful.

The gentle giant Michael Brown was “unarmed.”

Just thing about having 30 Michael Browns on your door step at 5 AM.

How are you going to react?

amatuerwrangler | August 6, 2020 at 10:54 am

Numerical superiority, disparity of numbers by an aggressor is a means of great bodily injury in self-defense law. Don’t those guys read Andrew Branca’s books? The aggressor does not have to be armed.

Other reports say the charges were filed by the CA Atty General.

Black homeowner lives don’t matter, to the Dhimmi-crats.

This crap/lunacy is occurring all across the country, by the way — vile and vicious Dhimmi-crat totalitarians, filing utterly absurd and legally unsupported criminal charges against Americans who have the temerity to defend their lives while in a home, while driving a car or a truck, while standing in the street. The apparatchik, totalitarian callousness of the Dhimmi-crats towards law-abiding citizens’ is contemptible.

stating the Laceys could see from their video security cam that the protestors who approached their door were not armed.

A ridiculous claim. I’ve carried rifles, shotguns, wakizashis concealed, just to show that it’s possible, even if impractical. No doorbell camera is going to show concealed weapons. And nobody can claim with a straight face that a mob of thirty needs weapons to be dangerous.

Lack of serious argument means that this is just for show, and everybody knows it.

buckeyeminuteman | August 6, 2020 at 11:13 am

What kind of a country do we live in where you can’t brandish a firearm on your own threshold???

As far as I’m concerned, her husband had every right to do what he did. Who cares if no weapons would have been seen on camera? There could have been something concealed, and the mob could still have shoved its way in. Keep in mind that Lacey is facing a strong challenge from the left, and AG Becerra was at least one time a member of the DSA while he was in Congress. This charge is political and designed to help her challenger.

Go to trial and then sue BLM and anyone who can be identified as being at your home on the date and time in question. The totality of circumstances works in the home owner’s favor. Time of day [O’dark 30], behavior of the people involved [deliberately creating a loud disturbance], the climate [acts of violence perpetrated against government targets], the receipt of death threats by the residents, people banging upon the front door [the doorbell was reportedly not used] and disparity of force [30+:2]. These “protestors” are lucky that they did not get shot, while pounding on the front door, under those conditions.

These yahoos doing these things in the name of protest are going to continue until they have to pay some price for their anti-social behavior.

However, people are also going to start having to use their heads when carrying a firearm in these situations. Do not point the muzzle of the weapon at anyone until you are justified in using it as either a legal threat or in active self defense.

    Dennis in reply to Mac45. | August 6, 2020 at 1:50 pm

    What about duty to retreat? I mean usually that doesn’t apply if you’re in your own home, but I doubt California has much of a castle doctrine.

      Mac45 in reply to Dennis. | August 6, 2020 at 3:51 pm

      Surprisingly, California has a very strong Castle Doctrine in place. A person is justified in using physical force, including deadly force, not just threatening to use deadly force, if someone forcibly enters or attempts to enter the person’s home or business. There is no duty to retreat under those circumstances.

      In this case, you have a large group of hostile people yelling, shouting and beating on drums in front of your home, in the middle of the night. Several of them come to your double front doors and, rather than simply using the doorbell [video or otherwise], they bang on your door. A strong case can be made that a reasonable man would reasonably assume that the people banging on the front door would very like forcibly enter the dwelling, if not confronted and warned to cease. Given the number of people in the crowd, displaying a firearm would also be reasonable.

        Mac, do you think it also helps the defense that he is clearly still not even fully awake. He looks like me before my first cup of coffee, a bit bleary and confused and not at all happy. He wasn’t totally alert and saw what most normal people would perceive as a threat (30 BLM people gathered in front of his house in the wee hours of the morning) and reacted perhaps not optimally but certainly within his rights? I mean isn’t the whole point of pre-dawn raids to catch people at their worst? To get them when they are not alert and capable of making their best decisions? This whole thing stinks to high heaven.

        The worst part of this whole case, though? These people will still vote Democrat.

          I hate to have to use an incompetent boob defense, except in relation to an accident. So, I wouldn’t go that route.

          Look, from the report, the occupants of the house had a reasonable fear of being victims of physical violence; due to the actions of the people outside, the time of day and the fact that the occupants had received threats of violence recently. Also, the people at the door were not expected. Given the circumstances, I would argue that the display of the firearm was designed to insure that none of the unknown people rushed the doorway as the occupant closed it. His exact actions, during the encounter, would better indicate how justifiable his actions were.

          To avoid these situations, people have to learn not to point guns at others until absolutely necessary. It is a matter of training.

          Thanks, Mac, I always value your insight. I know I would feel threatened in this circumstance (time of day, number of people, that they are BLM known for violence, drumming, etc.), but I definitely would not open the door. Where I live, though, I can count on local law enforcement, and if they didn’t get there in time, on robust Second Amendment protections should someone break into my home.

          This whole practice of intimidating people at their homes is a disaster waiting to happen. Something is going to go wrong, but I suspect that’s the hope.

          DaveGinOly in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | August 6, 2020 at 7:45 pm

          Still a good point. Prosecutors expect the law-abiding to be constantly alert, observant to the point of omniscience, as knowledgeable about the law as any attorney, and able to apply all of these characteristics unerringly in the very few fractions of a second one may be afforded before making a decision about how to deflect or defend against a potentially lethal attack.

          This seems unreasonable to me. Mistakes and errors of judgment are inevitable is such situations, even with perfect knowledge of a situation and a complete grasp of the law that applies to it. When such mistakes and errors of judgment are made, as a juror I’d be inclined to blame the attacker for forcing upon his victim the obligation to make those judgments and decisions. The responsibility to make them is not taken up by the defender voluntarily.

        Dennis in reply to Mac45. | August 6, 2020 at 5:21 pm

        OK, sounds like the law is on his side.

Some, select Black Lives Matter.

No trespassing charges?

    stl in reply to MarkS. | August 6, 2020 at 11:48 am

    Exactly, where are the trespassing charges. And, don’t accept the premise that a mob of 30 people are not dangerous if they are not armed, it’s irrelevant and their weapons may be concealed.

      fogflyer in reply to stl. | August 7, 2020 at 10:12 am

      In California, in order to charge someone with trespassing, they first have to be given the chance to leave, unless there are “no trespassing” signs posted or something obvious, like a fence, which is breached.

      Walking up to someone’s door is not illegal, so the protestors would need to be told to leave, and then refuse to comply, before they could be charged with trespassing.

      While I personally have no problem with this man’s response, it was not the best way to handle things. Staying inside and ordering them to leave would have been the best choice. OpenIng the door with a gun in your hand is also fine, but pointing it at them was a mistake.

    Mac45 in reply to MarkS. | August 6, 2020 at 3:57 pm

    Not just trespass, but disturbing the peace. Courts have held that the 1st Amendment right to assembly, even for political purposes, is not absolute. It can be limited to certain times and places in order to minimize disruption of society. That is why every single political subdivision in the US has laws, statutes and ordinances requiring notification of local government and, in many cases, the securing of a permit for any demonstration which will impact the safety, security and lifestyle of others. Legally, a person can not block traffic or disturb the peace and tranquility of others, without a permit to do so.

      DaveGinOly in reply to Mac45. | August 6, 2020 at 7:51 pm

      Yet here in Washington state, the blockage (without a permit) of a major interstate highway by leftist protesters is facilitated by the State Patrol (they block vehicular traffic, ostensibly to protect the motoring public, but effectively to enable the blockage). OTOH, law-abiding gun owners need a permit to have a rally on the lawn of the Capital Campus in Olympia, a situation in which no roads are blocked (except those blocked by the Patrol, to inconvenience the protesters by denying them on-campus parking, causing them to park blocks away) and no local residents are inconvenienced.

      txvet2 in reply to Mac45. | August 7, 2020 at 12:00 am

      Leaving the legalities to the lawyers, it seems to me (and seems to be general practice) that the Constitutional right of peaceable assembly applies primarily to public spaces, and pretty much ends when you start trespassing on private property.

In todays social media world how does a video like this stay buried for five months?

maybe he’ll call the couple in St. Louis for legal advice

I know I wouldn’t be on that jury if I lived there, because I would have already publicly declared that the early-morning trespassers should have been arrested instead.

Grrr8 American | August 6, 2020 at 12:14 pm

Note that in gun-deprived England (gun deprived for the law abiding, that is), people are routinely criminally charged for defending their property (houses).

The Marxist-Progressives don’t respect property rights (amongst myriad other rights they don’t respect).

This is all about conditioning people to believe that they are helpless before the Marxist-Progressives’ street enforcer mobs, and must acquiesce to its demands.

smalltownoklahoman | August 6, 2020 at 12:53 pm

Those protesters can claim to be peaceful all they want but if I crowd of people showed up on my property in the predawn hours raising a ruckus I’m not just going to take them at their word! In my view he was taking a real risk just opening that door to address them. One on one is usually ok odds, but one on two, three, more, that usually goes pretty bad for the one! Had they not been peaceful, or just maintaining a peaceful guise waiting for an opportunity, the moment he cracked that door they could have charged, busting in and knocking him down in the process, possibly knocking that gun out of his hands. Then he really would have been in a bad situation!

BierceAmbrose | August 6, 2020 at 1:55 pm

At what point does a mob become a reasonable threat just by being a mob?

At what point does swarming in itself become assault? (Perhaps re: Andy Ngo (in)famous video of swarming attack.)

At what point does wearing a uniform n colors communicate intent — which it’s intended to do, but then it’s deniable?

A mob, dressed for mayhem n armed, leaving a trail of destruction n mayhem behind comes to my door, confronting me, seems like both a reasonable danger, and an active threat.

BierceAmbrose | August 6, 2020 at 1:56 pm

Yeah, those protesters are “peaceful.”

One of Dave Chappell’s punchlines: “Ok, maybe you ain’t a ho. But you’re wearing a ho’s uniform.”

Dave Chappell — smartest man on the planet, or merely “one of?”

One of the best arguments for having an fully automatic sprinkler system (with additional clips) for your yard that you can manually turn on.

    drednicolson in reply to georgfelis. | August 6, 2020 at 7:53 pm

    Or a remote-activated release valve on your septic tank/sewer line.

    Hollymon in reply to georgfelis. | August 7, 2020 at 4:41 pm

    That thumbs down came from me when I clicked the wrong hand by mistake.

    At any rate, does anybody else see the OBVIOUS business opportunity here? Non-lethal front door deterrence. Sound, chemical (skunk oil and such)? How about infra-red heat lamps like at restaurants?

    One reasonable warning, time to vacate the area, and then a large dose of “Get the fuck off my porch!”

“I was cleaning my sprinkler system and it just went off!”

I live in a rural area in fly over country and since all this BLM thing has started I answer the door with a 45 & a very large aggressive looking dog no matter what time it is.

California seems awfully anti-gun for the same place that makes all those movies with endless gunshots. Even NCIS LA shoots an average of 400 shots per episode and it is set in LA. You know where the undercover car is a Escalade and a Porsche.

Anybody have a problem with mounting claymores in the front yard disguised as garden gnomes?


texansamurai | August 7, 2020 at 4:39 pm

In the south, gnomes would look out of place.

tried to advise a neighbor of ours, about a mile away, of the very same thing–they’re from WI–their yard looks like one of those Nature panoramic shots of a herd of penguins except it would portray gnomes of every conceivable size/color/shape

hideous–of course, they tool around in shirts emblazoned with ” i’m a cheeser ” or ” i’m with cheesehead. ” –lord
a pair of lookers to boot–one good glimpse of her in a two-piece bathing suit and you’re liable to sell the buick

Given she’s a DA in LA, it’s impossible to imagine she hasn’t prosecuted her share of lawful California gun owners for paper crimes and “gun crimes” that aren’t crimes anywhere but California. So if they nail her husband’s hide to the wall for this, I won’t lose a wink of sleep.
Go Commies, Beat Commies!

Really appreciate the comments on this thread. I concur that he should have yelled through the door instead of opening it. One verbal warning and then a single pump.

That said there’s and interesting repetition of history. If you research BLM it really is BPP 2.0–Marxist, anti-police, anti-Semitic. The Mulhern Act of 1967 was in response to the BPP “cop watching” patrols and is the reason the People’s Republic of Kalifornia is one of the few states that is not open carry.