Posted by Ms_California on May 9, 2008 at 7:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This whole story is so sad!

Posted by 805grl on May 9, 2008 at 8:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Quest also said an "amazing thing" is that 130 of McInerney's schoolmates have signed a petition asking the district attorney to transfer the case to juvenile court"...
I guess the 130 classmates 14 year old- imamture brains understand what signing the petition means..??
But there's no way a 14 year old can think anything like murder through due to immature thinking (sarcasm) PLEASE !!

Posted by slkrchck on May 9, 2008 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

what does his lipstick have to do with anything? sometimes i wear lipstick. am i in danger? i'm not currently harassing/stalking anyone.

Posted by rebel123 on May 9, 2008 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There's a reason we don't allow 14 year olds to drink, drive, vote, sign legal contracts and a myriad of other things reserved for adults. But when they kill someone, they are an adult and subject to adult prosecution and penalties. Cherry picking who we call "adult" is an interesting social phenomenon.

Posted by LivinInPoorMansPV on May 9, 2008 at 1:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How do you all feel if a 4 - 10 year old shoots and kills someone? It happens more than you think, do you all think those "adults" (do an adult crime do adult time as busymommy would say) should be tried as an adult? Also, if he had shot Larry 2 weeks earlier, this wouldn't be an issue.

Posted by rebel123 on May 9, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I feel it says volumes about our culture and society that so many people want this kid tried as an adult.

Posted by VOR on May 9, 2008 at 2:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LivinPoorMansPV, I think you may be in error. The fact is that if he had shot him 2 weeks earlier, according to prop 21 he would not automatically be charged as an adult, but it does not preclude the prosecution from obtaining a judicial waiver to try the person as an adult. This is what was done prior to prop 21. Prop 21 just took a step out of the process and made it less arbitrary, equally applying the law to all. He is also being charged as an adult, not only because he is 14 but has met many of the listed requirements to be tried as an adult such as pre-meditated murder, use of a firearm in the commision of murder etc... If he did not meet these requirements even though he is 14 he would not have been tried as an adult.

It is interesting in that Larry had just turned 15 2 weeks prior to his murder, making him as close to 14 as Brandon was to 13. What we have here is tragedy that could have been avoided if the school district had done their job, Casa Pacifica had acted responsibly as a proper guardian and the Ventura Rainbow Alliance had not pushed their agenda on a very susceptible and impressinable child.

Posted by MidTwn on May 9, 2008 at 2:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

rebel123 it's not "that so many people want this kid tried as an adult."

The law should apply evenly to all 14 year olds. You can not pick and choose who you will try as an adult. If the law starts making exceptions then why do we have laws?

Posted by Ms_California on May 9, 2008 at 2:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The reality of it is that he should be tried as an adult. He did commit an adult crime. He did know what he was doing and he knew it was wrong and would harm or kill Larry King. Having him tried as an adult is that it sets a precidence for crimes like this; these kids think they will get off scott free. Why is the killing of Larry King by a classmate socially acceptable and should not have stiff consequences? I don't understand! Ask yourself this... if your child was Larry, how would you feel about this? Honestly, how would you feel? Wouldn't you want justice for your child, for Larry and for the lives of other US kids that have been killed at the hands of their classmates? We can't keep exposing our children to this violence. I hate the fact that I send my kids to school each day thinking they are in danger of being killed at their school, it's supposed to be a safe haven for our kids.

On another note, being tried as an adult and being sentenced as an adult are two different things. If he is tried as an adult he will have longer sentencing. I doubt that they will sentence a 14 yro to death. I think that he serving only 7 years as a juvenile is just not long enough, it's not justice for Larry. Larry doesn't get a say in how long he will be dead.

Posted by slkrchck on May 9, 2008 at 2:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

what's an adult crime? seems like most crimes are immature and juvenile.

Posted by readerone1 on May 9, 2008 at 3:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Good point rebel123, we start bending the laws than why bother to have them. He's legal to be tried as one, move on with it. These debates about the law are what harm our system if we make exceptions for him, then the next (and there will be others) will ask for the same and once these exception cases become legal record then they are used in future cases as reasons for others to become exceptions as well. If he wins then we might a well change the law. killing deserves more then 7 years.

Posted by readerone1 on May 9, 2008 at 3:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

funny but the last article about King/McInerney they said kids including McInerney ages 14-21 (I think was the age rainge) don’t have the brain development to make good judgments, but now they want us to look at a petition of 130 kids as something significant!

Posted by juniormafia_ny on May 9, 2008 at 3:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Plain and simply put, McInerney is a JUVENILE that made a JUVENILE decision. He had no grasp of the long term consequences of his actions. As I stated in the last article, I have heard from my little cousin that attends EO Green, that King very publicly harrassed and made passes at McInerney. Shouldn't someone in an authoritive position have stepped in? I don't condone or think it's acceptable for King to have been killed, but maybe McInerney just reached a boiling point, saw that no one was going to intervene to stop the harrassment, and just made a stupid JUVENILE decision and took action on his own. He is a Juvenile and that is what he should be tried as.

Posted by Erkine_Childers on May 9, 2008 at 4:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Seems to me the law that should be changed is the one that says juvenile offenders can only serve up until they are 21 (or is it 25?) Why can't they just have harsher sentences in juvenile courts? It doesn't make sense to say a 14 year old is an adult, when the legal age of being an adult is 18. And I have to repeat the question- Why do so many people call murder an "adult crime"??? That makes no sense!

Posted by VOR on May 9, 2008 at 5:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If the kid isn't an adult... someone is...

Where did the gun come from, and how come they aren't being held responsible?! Isn't that the law in this state? If a minor kills someone with a gun and the weapon was not properley secured to deny access to that weapon then the owner of the weapon is also responsible? Seems someone is dropping the ball here.

Who made the gun accessable? From what I heard he even had his choice of 2 guns but chose the one he did because it was smaller and easier to sneak into school. Sounds pretty adult to me.

Only weeks past his 14th birthday, what makes him an adult?

Prop 21

Well, 14 year olds can't get a drivers license or drink beer, why hold him responsible?

If he had killed Larry in a alcohol induced auto-accident, would his age matter?

The law says you can't legally drive until age 16. The law says you can't legally drink alcohol until you are 21. The law says you are held to an adult standard if you are charged with murder in the first degree, with the specification of discharging a firearm during the commission of the crime, at age 14.

Brandon meets this standard as voted on by the majority of eligible voters.

Im sure the outcome of that vote would have been different if decided by teachers and 13 year olds, but it was voted in by a significant majority of eligible voters in the state. Interestingly enough, only 150 students at EO Green signed the petition to try Brandon as a juvenile. EO Green's student body is in excess of 1,000 students. Does that mean that more than 85% of the student body thinks he should be charged as an adult?

Folks, if a cold blooded murdering school shooter does not qualify as an adult eligible defendant, does a gang banger whose victim at least had a fighting chance?

If Brandon is not an 'adult', who is? He got the gun from somewhere...?! Why aren't those adults held accountable?

Let's all say a prayer tonight for Larry. Tomorrow, Brandon gets a haircut and has a play date with his 5 year old brother.

Posted by ironwoman on May 9, 2008 at 6:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

gringo, if charged as a juvenile, he will get juvenile life until the age 25 for such crimes like this one.
The voters in California voted for juveniles at the age of 14 to be tried as adults.
Once he took that gun to school and pulled the trigger, his intent was obviously to kill.
If one can't at the age 14 clearly understand that when you pull a gun trigger pointed at another's head it's not going to kill, then you've got to be stupid.
I wonder how many times Brandon played Playstation or Wii with a gun controller, if he knew when he pulled the trigger and aim at the target, he didn't know he was scoring points.
You people need to realize that the justice system is to protect the public. Brandon Mcinerney did the worst thing you can possibly do to another person....took another's life. He needs to be taken out of our society, away from all of our children. I would hate to see him out at a young age with his implusive decision making.

Posted by lanative on May 9, 2008 at 8:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If Brandon was so upset about getting a valentine from another boy why on earth would he shoot and kill him? What does he think is going to happen to him everyday for the rest of his life in state prison? He is going to have multiple male valentines everyday wanting him. They are going to be big and ugly, covered with scars and tatoos, with horrible body odor and bad breath and missing teeth. They are going to be carrying every social disease know to mankind. Its going to be just a horrible nightmare for him for the rest of his life in there. Why would anyone his age want to go to prison. What was he thinking when he shot that boy?

Posted by Face on May 9, 2008 at 9:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

VOR: "Folks, if a cold blooded murdering school shooter does not qualify as an adult eligible defendant, does a gang banger whose victim at least had a fighting chance?" FACE: That is too simple and plain of a comparison. 'If an apple is n't red, than it must be an orange!' There is a thing called circumstances that might lead to whether this teen was in a juvenile state of mind or behaving in a sick but juvenile way. This must be determined.

VOR: "If Brandon is not an 'adult', who is? He got the gun from somewhere...?! Why aren't those adults held accountable?" FACE: Perhaps a juvenile, and I agree with you 100% on where did that gun come from and who is responsible!

VOR: "Let's all say a prayer tonight for Larry. Tomorrow, Brandon gets a haircut and has a play date with his 5 year old brother." FACE: Yes a prayer, then some sarcasm. :)

Posted by playgirl805 on May 10, 2008 at 7:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If u ask me I think than Brandon knew what he was doing he had bad intension when he had the gun in his hand he wanted to kill...so he should be charged as an adult im sorry he might be 14 but what he did is not what a 14 year old boy does, so know he should be a man about it, im pretty sure he knew the concequences but still did it so know he has to do his time maybe now he should think about what his done... Larry might have harrass him but that didnt mean he had to be killed....I think the laws shouldnt be bend for him or any one what he did is an adult crime....but the person responsible for the gun should also be punished....

Posted by Stew_Pedasols on May 10, 2008 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

VOR: It is interesting in that Larry had just turned 15 2 weeks prior to his murder, making him as close to 14 as Brandon was to 13. What we have here is tragedy that could have been avoided if the school district had done their job, Casa Pacifica had acted responsibly as a proper guardian and the Ventura Rainbow Alliance had not pushed their agenda on a very susceptible and impressinable child.

STEW: it's interesting how VOR can easily point fingers at others he knows nothing about. I guess it's always easier to put the blame on others and skirt the issue at hand--murder (juvenile or adult)--it's still premeditated murder. the real issue isn't larry's gender or clothing preferences but brandon's lack of coping skills and use of a weapon--as well has how he acquired it.

but since you seem to know so much--can you giev us specifics--not media processed rumors--but true accounts? probably not. so please stop making definitive statements that blame others. we know your opinion--but then, you know what opinions are like...

Posted by VOR on May 10, 2008 at 11:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Stew_Pedasols, maybe I don't know so much, but I do know that if the school followed its own rules and acted upon them this would not have happened. If they had intervened and made Larry adhere to the dress code some of the tension would not be there. If he was indeed harrassing Brandon then why was he not suspended? If Brandon was bullying Larry, then why was Brandon not suspended. Seems to me that the entire conflict could have been avoided if the school did what they were supposed to do.

Now lets look at Casa Pacifica where Larry was staying. They allowed Larry to go to school dressed as he was, knowing that it was in violation of the school policy. The dress code specifically states that appearance should not draw attention, well if makeup and pink high heeled boots doesn't draw attention then they must be blind or totally out of control. No responsible parent would allow that. If they want to play the parental role then they should act as responsible parents.

Next lets looks at the Ventura Rainbow Alliance. What a piece of work these people are. I saw an interview on TV with one of their members, a transgendered kid, that said he was counselling Larry. Give me a break, this kid came across as a total idiot that seemed more messed up then anyone I had ever known, and he was counselling Larry, a young impressionable youth. You have to be kidding. What credentials did he have? Was he licensed to counsel minors? He was in no position to counsel anyone yet alone someone as voulnerable as Larry. The Ventura Rainbow Alliance did no favors to the gay community by the way they pushed their agenda on Larry. This was criminal in the way they handled things with him and they should look very hard at what they had done and make sure they don't do it to some other mixed up kid.

So Stew, perhaps I don't know alot about this case, perhaps I do, but what happened is obvious and there are a lot of factors that caused this that should have been handled by responsible adults and wasn't. All of the people involved should be tried for child abuse or reckless endangerment, summarily discharged from their jobs for the harm they have caused, and never be allowed to work with kids again.

All of the above in no way excuses Brandon for what he did. He chose to fix the problem through violence instead of mediation. I am sure he has had a while to think about that and will have many many years to think even more about his actions.

Posted by VOR on May 10, 2008 at 11:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Stew_Pedasols, maybe I don't know so much, but I do know that if the school followed its own rules and acted upon them this would not have happened. If they had intervened and made Larry adhere to the dress code some of the tension would not be there. If he was indeed harassing Brandon then why was he not suspended? If Brandon was bullying Larry, then why was Brandon not suspended. Seems to me that the entire conflict could have been avoided if the school did what they were supposed to do.

Now lets look at Casa Pacifica where Larry was staying. They allowed Larry to go to school dressed as he was, knowing that it was in violation of the school policy. The dress code specifically states that appearance should not draw attention, well if makeup and pink high heeled boots doesn't draw attention then they must be blind or totally out of control. No responsible parent would allow that. If they want to play the parental role then they should act as responsible parents.

Next lets looks at the Ventura Rainbow Alliance. What a piece of work these people are. I saw an interview on TV with one of their members, a transgendered kid, that said he was counselling Larry. Give me a break, this kid came across as a total idiot that seemed more messed up then anyone I had ever known, and he was counselling Larry, a young impressionable youth. You have to be kidding. What credentials did he have? Was he licensed to counsel minors? He was in no position to counsel anyone yet alone someone as vulnerable as Larry. The Ventura Rainbow Alliance did no favors to the gay community by the way they pushed their agenda on Larry. This was criminal in the way they handled things with him and they should look very hard at what they had done and make sure they don't do it to some other mixed up kid.

So Stew, perhaps I don't know a lot about this case, perhaps I do, but what happened is obvious and there are a lot of factors that caused this that should have been handled by responsible adults and wasn't. All of the people involved should be tried for child abuse or reckless endangerment, summarily discharged from their jobs for the harm they have caused, and never be allowed to work with kids again.

All of the above in no way excuses Brandon for what he did. He chose to fix the problem through violence instead of mediation. I am sure he has had a while to think about that and will have many many years to think even more about his actions.

Posted by VOR on May 10, 2008 at 11:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Stew_Pedasols, maybe I don't know so much, but I do know that if the school followed its own rules and acted upon them this would not have happened. If they had intervened and made Larry adhere to the dress code some of the tension would not be there. If he was indeed harassing Brandon then why was he not suspended? If Brandon was bullying Larry, then why was Brandon not suspended. Seems to me that the entire conflict could have been avoided if the school did what they were supposed to do.

Now lets look at Casa Pacifica where Larry was staying. They allowed Larry to go to school dressed as he was, knowing that it was in violation of the school policy. The dress code specifically states that appearance should not draw attention, well if makeup and pink high heeled boots doesn't draw attention then they must be blind or totally out of control. No responsible parent would allow that. If they want to play the parental role then they should act as responsible parents.

Next lets looks at the Ventura Rainbow Alliance. What a piece of work these people are. I saw an interview on TV with one of their members, a transgendered kid, that said he was counselling Larry. Give me a break, this kid came across as a total idiot that seemed more messed up then anyone I had ever known, and he was counselling Larry, a young impressionable youth. You have to be kidding. What credentials did he have? Was he licensed to counsel minors? He was in no position to counsel anyone yet alone someone as vulnerable as Larry. The Ventura Rainbow Alliance did no favors to the gay community by the way they pushed their agenda on Larry. This was criminal in the way they handled things with him and they should look very hard at what they had done and make sure they don't do it to some other mixed up kid.

So Stew, perhaps I don't know a lot about this case, perhaps I do, but what happened is obvious and there are a lot of factors that caused this that should have been handled by responsible adults and wasn't. All of the people involved should be tried for child abuse or reckless endangerment, summarily discharged from their jobs for the harm they have caused, and never be allowed to work with kids again.

All of the above in no way excuses Brandon for what he did. He chose to fix the problem through violence instead of mediation. I am sure he has had a while to think about that and will have many many years to think even more about his actions.

Posted by VOR on May 10, 2008 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sorry for the duplicate posts. This website seems to have its share of problems with stuff like that.

Posted by Stew_Pedasols on May 11, 2008 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

VOR, if you remember in previous articles and if you ever worked for any type of facility or institution, you would realize what guidelines they would have to follow and how restricted they are to act especially if there could be a call of discrimination. i do recall a comment on how larry had to adhere to dress codes and if he brought clothes or kept them at school, how could that be the fault of care takers--kids hide things from parents or guardians all of the time--we can only advise kids to monitor themselves-- brandon brought a gun to school--did his guardian allow this? if larry did indeed dress as you said he must have and violate the dress code--did his guardian's simply allow this...don't be too hasty to place blame--kids will make their own choices as we do in our daily lives...i've ran into some adults who have a variety of preferences--from cross dressing, being gay, being gangsters, being overbearingly pompous-- but i didn't choose to harm them.

Posted by VOR on May 11, 2008 at 12:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Stew, I agree with what you said pretty much. But the caregivers in this case did enable him. As far as the gun, yes Brandon's caregiver did allow this. By his negligence in not locking the gun away in an approved lock box, not having a trigger lock etc... That is the law and it was broken, not sure why he is not in jail along with his son. This was a gross violation of the law.

The school should have notified Casa Pacifica after the first violation to let them know that Larry was wearing inappropriate clothing at school and sent him home to dress properly. Dress codes are enforceable and constitutional, so it was not a violation of his free speech or a case sexual discrimination.

Unfortunately here in a time when political correctness has trumped common sense you see a lot of stupid decisions like this that are just wrong and cause more problems then they fix.

This is why I said that these entities dropped the ball and have a lot of fault here. I do not believe that they are evil, they all perform a good service when they do what they are supposed to do. It is when they try to do what they are not chartered to do where they get in trouble and they failed this time in a big way.

Again this in no way excuses Brandon for his cold blooded murder of Larry, which everyone knows there was no excuse for, but shows that there are others that need to be held accountable as well.

Posted by Stew_Pedasols on May 11, 2008 at 7 p.m. (Suggest removal)

VOR--i agree that there are instances of where political correctness trumps common sense but aside from any supposed wrong doing of choice in attire or the inability to control your typical teenagers of expressing themselves in a very turbulent period of their lives, the focus should be on the inability of one one young teenager to find another way of expressing himself without the use of a deadly weapon or deadly force. there are many instances of violence--from the recent killing of an oxnard man in anaheim over something pretty foolish to fathers who kill the kids and/or parents of rival teams during little league or junior league games--it's all wrong. if brandon was in a gang and larry wore a rival's colors--how would this be any different--wrong attire/ senseless killing.

Posted by VOR on May 11, 2008 at 11:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Stew,

"it's all wrong. if brandon was in a gang and larry wore a rival's colors--how would this be any different"

Well actually EO Greene does enforce an anti gang colors policy. I have heard of them sending kids home because they wore blue pants instead of black pants. I didn't know that blue pants was a gang color, used to be just called blue jeans when I went to school. Wouldn't you think pink high heeled boots and makeup would be at least as bad as that and that action should have been taken? So there is no difference between wearing clothing that will draw attention and gang colors, both are covered in the school rules as being unacceptable.

I agree with you that it was the inability of one person to control his actions and act upon the situation with violence and cause a senseless killing. Apparently there was some sort of altercation a few days prior to the murder between Larry and Brandon. If the school had once again acted responsibly and followed their own zero tolerance policy, both students would have been either suspended or expelled. At the very least they two of them could have been brought together in a supervised environment and worked out their problems through communication, neither of which happened and we know the uhnfortunate result of that failure.

Yes I agree with you, killing is wrong. Unless something happens to make kids understand this and that all life has value no matter who or what the other person is or believes, and that there are substantial penalties for the taking of a life that makes it a bad deal to do it, we are all in big trouble. I am older, have a bum ticker, and I am almost grateful that I probably won't be around in another 20 years or so. The way things are headed, unless there are big changes, this type of thing will most likely be the norm instead of an aboration, and that is very scarey.

Posted by TheVeracious1 on May 12, 2008 at 1:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

VOR-

You wrote, "Let's all say a prayer tonight for Larry. Tomorrow, Brandon gets a haircut and has a play date with his 5 year old brother."

I understand why the public feels we need harsher and harsher sentences. Your comment implies that Brandon has it easy. We read about these high profile tragedies through the years, yet we never hear about what kind of impact these tragedies have on all those involved as the years pass. Maybe if people knew the difficult and tortured lives that some of these kids now live, the public would feel differently, and know that kids will often punish themselves more harshly that a court ever could.

I used to believe there was nothing more painful than the death of a child. I know now I was wrong.

I have never experienced the death of a child.
Nor will I EVER experience the comfort of knowing my tortured child is at peace.

Today was Mother's Day and a very sad day for both Larry and Brandon's mothers. Both families need our prayers.

Posted by AnnaWhaat on May 12, 2008 at 9:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I am still questioning Brandons mind. Did he mentally break down from all the teasing. A normal person would have waited and lurked in the bushes to shoot then hide. Brandon did this right in front of everyone! That is abnormal. What was in his brain, how many wires were crossed????

Posted by readerone1 on May 12, 2008 at 10:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Gringo_Istmeno, Good point!! I think you're in the right direction. Harsher punishment for juveniles who commit harsh crimes. Lets not just give a blind freedom at 25, they should serve a time that fits the crime. Plus once out isn't their records sealed while these “adult” crimes carry felonies around for life.

Posted by AnnaWhaat on May 12, 2008 at 3:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

mmshoot , A parent must pay to have a childs records sealed. Then at that time ONLY a Judge can unseal them in the future. BUT if anyone is on probation or parole they CAN'T have them sealed at all.
I don't know I just really believe he should be tried as a Juevenile. I do not think mentally he was all there. He needs help. So much could have been done. But wasn't . So no need to wonder about that now. But I wish there was a way to detect if he is mentally stable.????

Posted by TheVeracious1 on May 12, 2008 at 11:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is not about holding children responsible for “adult decisions” but more about holding children responsible for all the “adult’s decisions”.

There was a boy at Casa Pacifica several years ago who had been sexually assaulting and harassing another boy there. As it turned out, both boys needed to be sent to Vista Del Mar Hospital a few days apart. The staff at Casa FAILED to notify Vista that this boy had sexually assaulting other boys at the school, AND Casa never bothered to mention to the staff at Vista that one of his victims was currently a patient there.

Just imagine how shocked, scared, and vulnerable that boy must have felt when the hospital staff walked into his hospital room to introduce this new patient, and to help get his PERPETRATOR settled in their shared hospital room?

Thankfully, this boy had someone he trusted to protect him, and he reached out for help, so was IMMEDIATELY taken out of a situation. A situation created by the incompetence and negligence of ADULTS. A situation that no adult or child could ever be expected to cope with particularly well.

I would hate to imagine what may have happened if that boy was ignored or not taken seriously and was left to just deal with it on his own? If the perpetuator ended up dead, would we want a harsh life punishment for this boy, and feel compelled to “teach him a lesson” since he was old enough to know right from wrong and there is just no excuse, ever!? The only lesson that boy could have ever possibly learned is that life is cruel and evil filled with sick people only interested in hurting people.

Speaking of knowing right from wrong, do you think that lawyers for Casa or the school district would admit their negligence without a fight? Hell no! They don’t want any financial or legal liability. It’s so much easier now with Prop 21 to blame the kid, and since he’s a killer now, we can throw him away and feel pretty good and justified about it.

I think it’s time ADULTS start behaving responsibly. It is the adults who have a thing or two to learn about the consequences of their actions!

VOR – If you feel good about harsher and longer sentences, at least be honest about the fact your preference is only best when you’re trying to increase crime. Do you work in a profession that somehow benefits from increased crime and incarceration? If not you make no sense. You may want to check out the link below.

Law Enforcement Leaders Say California Is Risking Lives and Wasting Money by Failing to Fully Fund Interventions Proven to Cut Juvenile Crime in Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties
Read the report for yourself! http://www.fightcrime.org/releases.ph...

Posted by Stew_Pedasols on May 13, 2008 at 11:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

there still seems to be a lot of finger pointing and bashing of agencies and unconnected mudslinging--seems like some people have hidden agendas behind their talk--we need to stay focused on the facts--and if we must present the mud, at least bring out all of the facts and not just the ones that support your opinions...