Elections have consequences and San Francisco voters got exactly what they wanted. Twice.
San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin was booted from office in a recall election that had everything to do with soft-on-crime policies, including a refusal to lock up criminals committing their crimes with firearms while at the same time denying law-abiding citizens their Second Amendment rights.
Blue state governors, attorneys general, mayors and district attorneys with the same policies of sneering at law-abiding gun owners while letting criminals walk might want to take note.
Short Tenure
San Francisco is a city with strict gun control within a state that has among the nation’s strictest gun control laws. On top of that, the city cut $120 million from its law enforcement budget after caving to the “defund the police” movement.
San Francisco residents had already elected Chesa Boudin as District Attorney with a hair over 50 percent of the vote. Boudin, a former public defender, was well-known as a “criminal justice reformer” who would bring a soft-on-crime approach to the office.
His father was a member of the Left-wing extremist group Weather Underground who spent 40 years in prison for second-degree murder. His mother was also a member and spent 20 years in prison. The younger Boudin was raised by Weather Underground co-founder Bill Ayers and all of this was public. San Franciscans wanted it. That was until they didn’t.
Residents saw immediate change with Boudin’s radical justice vision. While his diehard supporters praised his elimination of cash bail for criminals and putting fewer people behind bars, the murder rate went up, as did violent crime, shoplifting and burglary. Viral videos of San Francisco criminals running rampant became commonplace.
The situation was so bad early in Boudin’s tenure, the San Francisco police told people they were out of luck if certain crimes were committed. They announced, publicly, that they wouldn’t respond to certain calls for help. Voters had enough. Boudin was just given the pink slip after more than 60 percent of voters bounced him out.
Self-Defense
In early 2020, California residents were becoming alarmed by the coronavirus shutdowns and crime spikes. Those spurred people who previously supported gun control to buy firearms.
New gun owner Scott Kane explained California’s obstacles for lawful gun ownership, saying, “This has taken me, a law-abiding citizen with nary an unpaid parking ticket to my name, over a month. Meanwhile, Joe Bad Guy has probably purchased several fully automatic AK-47s out of the back of an El Camino in a shady part of town with zero background checks.”
Boudin’s soft-on-crime policies drove more Californians, like that of other district attorneys including Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón, to take up lawful gun ownership and protection of their families, businesses and homes, into their own hands. Even with all the hoops and strict gun control laws, nearly 4 million law-abiding Californians have purchased a firearm since 2020.
“My gun store has had a run like I’ve never seen before. It was just an avalanche of new gun buyers for the first time.,” said Todd Cotta, owner of Kings Gun Center. Geneva Solomon, owner of Redstone Firearms also in California, added buyers weren’t just buying firearms and leaving. They were signing up for training and practice. “We’ve definitely seen an uptick in the class options we offer. Before they would never sell out. Now they sell out two days after we post them.”
National Implications
The rejection of Boudin by San Francisco voters, one of the most progressive cities in the country, is telling. Voters want safety in their cities. That includes their fundamental right to lawfully own firearms for self-defense.
Support for more gun control remains low. Americans recognize not enough is being done to control crime. Support for enforcing current laws is high and voter support for a ban on modern sporting rifles (MSRs), is at an all-time low.
What’s clearly apparent is voters, even those in San Francisco, reject the soft-on-crime policies and approach of progressive prosecutors like Boudin. When it comes down to it – they’ll send them packing.
Larry Keane is SVP for Government and Public Affairs, Assistant Secretary and General Counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
![By Larry Keane President Joe Biden traveled to New York City for a media event to try and show America he’s doing something about rampant crime. Instead, he blamed the Second Amendment and lawful gun owners, said nothing about holding criminals to account and repeated the same tired lies about the firearm industry he keeps at the ready – lies “fact-checked” as being false each time he’s previously recited them. It makes no difference to the president. He’s not even trying anymore. To President Biden and national gun control groups the problem is always the gun and the law-abiding members of the industry. It’s never the criminal. Blaming the ‘Resistance’ President Biden was joined by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Democratic New York City Mayor Eric Adams for a “Gun Violence Strategies Partnership” meeting to talk about how to solve the crime surge, particularly those involving firearms. Instead of real solutions, the focus devolved into blaming law-abiding gun owners and again pushing a gun control agenda. “Enough is enough,” President Biden said. “Because we know we can do things about this, but for the resistance, we’re getting from some sectors of the government and the Congress and the state legislatures, and the organizational structures out there.” That “resistance” the president spoke of is the American people. Over the past two years they’ve become fed up with police defunding policies and soft-on-crime prosecutors, like Manhattan’s Democratic District Attorney Alvin Bragg. They’ve invested in their own safety. The “resistance” is the 21 million lawful gun buyers in 2020, including more than 8.4 million first-time buyers, and the 18.5 million gun buyers in 2021, with more than 5.4 million first-timers. The ”resistance” has backstopped Congress from passing federal gun control that don’t address crime. It also stopped President Biden’s nominations of paid gun control lobbyist David Chipman to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and banking activist Saule Omarova as Comptroller of the Currency because not even all U.S. Senate Democrats could support them. They would have turned those agencies into bludgeons to hammer the firearm industry to achieve a special interest, gun control agenda. Favorite Falsehoods The president turned his aim from lawful gun owners towards the firearm industry and repeated a lie he’s rehearsed several times before. “Imagine had we had a liabil… [sic] they’re the only industry in America that is exempted from being able to be sued by the public. Only one,” the president protested. “Why the gun manufacturers?… It’s got to end. They’ve got to be held responsible for the things they do that are irresponsible.” He repeated the claim for emphasis. “And I find that outrageous.” This is flatly false. The president knows by now, or his speechwriters do and they don’t bother with the facts. CNN, Politicfact and Washington Post have all checked President Biden on his remark, including after he said it in the White House Rose Garden. CNN cleanly rebuked it. “This is false. Gun manufacturers are not entirely exempt from being sued, nor are they only industry with some liability protections.” Politifact rated it “false.” Washington Post wasn’t kinder, saying, “Biden is wrong to claim the gun industry is totally immune.” The firearm industry has liability protections under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), bipartisan legislation enacted under former President George W. Bush. The firearm industry cannot be held liable when unaffiliated third-parties, in this case criminals, misuse a legal, lawfully sold product. It’s fundamental tort law and is similar to an individual attempting to hold Ford and Budweiser responsible for drunk driving deaths. The law was passed in direct response to lawsuits filed against the industry by control groups and municipalities like the city of New York and the state of New York. These type of lawsuit continue to be filed, now even by foreign governments represented by the same gun control group, the Brady Center. Colonial-Era Error President Biden continued to ignore facts on the Second Amendment and its history. He even erred when speaking about the Revolution-era days and why the right to keep and bear arms was so sacrosanct. “When the amendment was passed, it didn’t say anybody could own a gun and any kind of gun and any kind of weapon,” President Biden remarked. “You couldn’t buy a cannon, and when – the – when this, uh, this amendment was passed.” It did, and does, say the right of the People “shall not be infringed.” Even The Washington Post was brutal in their assignment of “Four Pinocchio’s” to this statement. “Biden has already been fact-checked on this claim — and it’s been deemed false. We have no idea where he conjured up this notion about a ban on cannon ownership in the early days of the Republic, but he needs to stop making this claim.” In fact, the Constitution of early America – before the Bill of Rights, and Second Amendment, was even ratified – granted and encouraged “special waivers” to American merchants and sailors, “allowing private individuals to act as pirates on behalf of the United States against countries engaged in war with it.” Americans given waivers and who owned warships obviously also obtained cannons for use in battle. In fact, it is still perfectly legal to buy a cannon today. It is the presidents’ fundamental misunderstanding and blatant lying about the Second Amendment that informs his gun control agenda and misguided approach to solving the crime problem. Millions of law-abiding Americans took ownership of their Second Amendment rights to protect themselves, understanding the president won’t. Instead of mangling the meaning of the right and pushing for more gun control on law-abiding Americans, the president should keep it simple. Take on the criminals and punish them for breaking the law.](https://cdn-ilbhaoh.nitrocdn.com/bgKlmMbwrWXRONuqEtcbCEpELIavckvt/assets/images/optimized/rev-5059075/cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/download-26-218x150.jpeg "Harris is a Human Disinformation Campaign When It Comes to Guns")
Whether underground or not. There’s one thing we can agree on: he’s gone.
This being ‘cisco, his replacement will likely be only slightly less bad and slightly more discreet in pushing badness.
Less bad is more good? Or less good? Good as gone!!!!
Well, let’s get something straight. Elections are about “majorities.” If a prosecutor, or otherwise, start supporting the criminal element, it is because the majority are criminals or sympathetic to criminals. San Francisco has been taken over by the morally bereft, drug addict sidewalk needle droppers, sidewalk poopers, and common looters. Luckily, they had enough sane people left, to remove the prosecutor from this position. If they install a strict and hardline prosecutor, mayor, and other candidates, they could drive the criminal element from their city. Buuuuuuuuut, we all know they won’t. They are the left, and this is the future they want. Watch and see, and it will only get worse in these places.
IT’s notb really about anybody having a single handgun for percieved home self defence or hunting is it?
Consider this. From what I can gather fromm the web there are about 400,million lEGALLY held and registered firearms inn the USA and an unknown number of those held ILLEGALY. Since only, even after a spike in purchases during COVID, around half of all Americans own any kind of firearm it means that some persons may well have an awful lot of completely unnessessary firepower at hand. What for exactly since the requesits of the Constitution would be served by the ownership of a single firearm.??
I can see a wish for HOME self defence in such a lawless society as the USA though how effective it actually is in general is not so clear cut. The case for STREET self defence is not nearly so clear and indeed the carrying of a handgun for STREET SELF Defence, according to existing statistics, is far more likely to get you killed than it is to save your life.
Nobody actually needs more than a single 9mm 0 or .38 for home self defence or a FIVE shot bolt action rifle of a suitable calibre for hunting [I might make a exception for .22 rimfire ‘plinkling rifles] After all the Great Big Game Hunters of yesteryear in Africa and the Sub-Continent used heavy calibre DOUBLES or five shot ‘bolters’. But MILITARY STYLE semi-autos? No chance. THey have only ONE use to KILL PEOPLE
Herr dacian the nazi dog killer at it again.
Albert Hall is hardness.
IT really about having a single handgun for percieved home self defence or hunting? Illegal guns are illegal and indeed unncessary. Legal guns are legal. The requesits of the Constituion are served by the government not infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
The clear cuts of shooting a bad person is stopping them from committing violence wherever that evil-doers might seek to harm others. Five shots of .38 not always! Multiple attackers. Meth heads amped up and able to take dozens of rounds before stopping.
Hunting is irrelevant.
Yes, MILITARY STYLE semi-autos have ONE use to KILL BAD PEOPLE. And that is a great use!
You should randomly capitalize some words when you ramble nonsensically on the internet. It makes your position so much more clear…. gfy
Bob
Bob, The constitutions are NOT IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS!!!
DOOD!!!! Reread that pesky Second Article of Ammendment.It states plainer than the growing pinocchio nose on yer mug that we HAVE the RIGHT to KEEP (own, possess, buy, sell, make, destroy, modify and BEAR (carry about, use, depoly, hold, fire, tes, ship, ) ARMS (please note the PLURAL, thjat is, more than one.
You seem to think that the only firarms LEGALLY owned are also REGISTERED. Maybe in the socialist commie run state YOU occupy that might be the case, Where I live there IS no “registratio”. The closest they come to “registering” is when they take my bribe and send me i the post in return for that bribe a plastic card, a Mother May I Card that “allows” me to carry about a loaded firearm concealed upon my person nearlyeverywhere I want to go )courthouses being the mst notable exception, but they orivide, by the same law, a secure lockbox where I can store my weapon whilst I am inside taking care of business. I;m OK with that because it makes the courthouse truly a gun free zone. Everyone entering is searched). Please note: with this system I, PERSONALY am the one being “registered” (despite my unalientable RIGHT to carry that firearm about at will) but they have no idea of what I will be carrying, or what I own.
You then move on and imply strongly that unregistered guns are ILLEGAL guns. This is absolutely NOT so,
Stop lying. WE will continue to buy, carry, use, repair, make any arms we deem useful in spite of guys like you who think otherwise. You can have yuor rotten to the core Britain and your disarmed helpless population with government uffishuls who look the other way when “certain people groups” are known to proliferate and promote (read: sell for huge profits) certain illegal and immoral “services” i what amounts to chattel slavery. AND for roving gangs of hoodlums to roam about using weapons other than firearms, every bit as lethal, to harrass, kil, rob, harm, thousands of Brits annually.
Clean up your own nest before you start telling US what we shuold/should not do here.
Overanus
“Nobody actually needs more than a single 9mm 0 or .38 for home self defence or a FIVE shot bolt action rifle of a suitable calibre for hunting…”
It’s called the ‘Bill of Rights’, you insolent subject. Not a ‘Bill of Needs’, or a ‘Bill of Hunting’, it’s a fucking ‘Bill of Rights’.
As in, I ‘need’ *Zero* reason to keep and bear them. I can, because it’s my RIGHT.
Now fuck off to your little spinless island that lost all it’s real men in WW 1 and WW 2. We don’t take orders from ‘Nancy Boys’ like you.
Is that clear enough for you, little boy Albert? 🙂
Hey Al: Try carrying ANYTHING for the explicit purpose of self-“defenCe” back in your country, and see what happens. Then once you are out of “gaol”, you can then consider what we might carry.
RE: sir albert hall of shame…”What for exactly since the requesits of the Constitution would be served by the ownership of a single firearm.??”
The 2A clearly states…the right to keep and bear Arms. It does not say an arm or a firearm, etc. If you were not so fixated on seeing what you want to see you would not have to be told that. Try again ol’ chap.
Show us on the doll where the bad man touched you.
Albert the Subject,
Reading comprehension is not exactly your strong point, is it, subject???
Where, in the 2A, is “hunting” (or even “self-defense”) mentioned??? Oh, that’s right, it isn’t. IF you were literate, which you aren’t, and had BOTHERED to read, oh, say, the Declaration of Independence (you should AT LEAST know that one; we tattoed it onto your sorry arses before we sent you home in disgrace), the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers, and the notes of the Constitutional Convention, you might not need to be educated. But, since you’re an ahistorical, ignorant, limey subject, let me ‘splain it to you, Lucy – we have the RIGHT to “keep and bear arms”. Not “a single gun, for hunting”. Not an “acceptable” gun, for self-defense. Not a “plinking gun”. “Arms”. For whatever purpose we deem appropriate. We ARE responsible for the consequences of such use, as is appropriate.
We don’t need to ask permission from our “queen”. We don’t need, or want, the “approval” of d***less Euroweenies. Your arrogant “disapproval”?? We give not a single shart. Don’t like that?? Cry me a river, subject. WE. DON’T. CARE!!! Now, sod off, swampy.
Prince Albert, haven’t you suffocated already? Someone needs to snap the lid closed on your can a little tighter. The United States shed ourselves of your ilk long ago. Call us when you need us to save your shit again. Until then, shut up and leave us alone.
Right oh old chap.
The Second Amendment is exactly about we the people having gunms made for killing people. Has nothing to do with hunting.
Your best bet my fine fellow is to shout for the repeal of the 2A.
Previously you were touting the SMLE but now want to limit center fire rifles to 5 rounds? You do realize you as a self-proclaimed former Chairforce armoror would know a SMLE or No4 has a TEN round magazine?
Albert Hall,
No one NEEDS an ultra-high-definition television with a 55-inch wide screen–they can see all of their desired video content just fine on an old school analog monitor with 360 line resolution and a 16-inch wide screen.
Similarly, no one NEEDS a Dolby 5.1 Channel surround sound system with sub-woofer for their television–they can hear the audio of their desired video content just fine with the tiny 3-inch built-in television speaker in mono (not stereo).
A joyful and full life is about more than what we need, which is nothing more than one clothing outfit, a tent, gruel, and water. Life is about hoping and trying to create and achieve at least a little bit beyond what we absolutely need. That applies to clothing, food, shelter, furniture, televisions, and yes even firearms.
It’s sad how you do not understand what the constitution is and means to be and just how far away from reality your perception is.
Please do some research on why the bill of rights are such an important part of the us government and why it is there.
The 2nd amendment is there to prevent the government from being filled with extremists and those extremists deciding without due process the commit atrocity or mass genocide on those people they are charged with protecting.
Today it could be one group, and you may not be in that targeted group. Tomorrow you will be, and then where will you stand on the matter? When a group that you trusted turns on you and comes to murder or enslave you and your family, you’ll wish you had some way of fighting back.
Yes, guns are made to stop a threat to life more efficiently and also give those that are less capable a more even chance.
If the government has better weaponry than the citizens, the citizens can be easily oppressed by a government with evil intent and basically enslave and impose genocide at will. Don’t believe me? Just look at history both past and present. There are plenty of examples.
However, vilifying the device used to defend oneself is misplaced. McVay murdered hundreds with a box truck and fertilizer bomb, others have used vehicles and knives for mass attacks and murder.
The fault lie not in the availability of said tool, it lies with the people, societal acceptance of certain activities. Non-enforcement of existing laws and a lack of mental health assistance.
Read this, it’s *quite* enlightening about how the whole criminal enterprise functions in San Fran :
‘The Criminal Order Beneath the ‘Chaos’ of San Francisco’s Tenderloin’
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/06/16/the_criminal_order_beneath_the_chaos_of_san_franciscos_tenderloin_836918.html
Nothing will change unless the ones running things there demand change. And I just might have a way to do that –
Order the wealthy with nice homes to “Do their part” and host street people in tents to live in their back yards, on those nice lawns. (Even better, the front yards as well). Order them to allow them to use their bathrooms in those nice homes, unless they have no problem with human waste on their doorstep.
Watch how fast they stop tolerating that literal crap… 🙂
Chesa Boudin had better been glad the recall remedy worked…. because if he would’ve survived the recall, somone was going to deliver a more permanent solution… Gaston’ had better hope his recall works as well… people are getting fed up & ready to water the big tree…LAW and ORDER must return..
❤Hi) My name possum I’m 240 years old in human age Beginning Pest nuisance at 18)
I love being photographed and not kicked in the nudes)>Please rate my photos hhteepeeslashslashposdotid1234
“❤Hi) My name possum I’m 240 years old in human age Beginning Pest nuisance at 18)…”
Damn, it says here Possums only live 2 years? :
https://opossumsocietyus.org/general-opossum-information/
I’ve known you at least 5 years by now, how do you do it?
Lots and lots of ‘medicinal’ Bourbon? 🙂
EDIT – “The opossum also has opposable thumbs on its hind feet for holding onto branches.”
*That’s* how you do it! 😉
Ha! Excellent. One question teepee crawler, did you get Moderated™ by Big Brother for your spamming efforts?
TAKE A LESSON FROM CHINA , HELL BUY EVERY THING FROM THEM ANYWAY..
ALL DRUG DEALERS ARE SHOT IN BACK OF THERE FRIGN HEAD ….
AND IF CAN’T GET USERS OFF DRUGS , SHOOT IN BACK OF THE HEAD , THAT BE ONE SHOT THAT CURES IT ALL ….
San Franchina has no guns for head shots NTZASS!!! Where are the guns? Where!!
Yet these people would vote for the senile Puppet again in a heartbeat.
“His father was a member of the Left-wing extremist group Weather Underground who spent 40 years in prison for second-degree murder. His mother was also a member and spent 20 years in prison. The younger Boudin was raised by Weather Underground co-founder Bill Ayers and all of this was public.”
Sometimes it true that, as the old saying goes, ‘the apple doesn’t fall fall far from the tree’. In this case probably in attitude towards incarceration and crime in general.
The criminal justice system can not be ‘reformed’ by letting the criminals go, and giving them basically a ‘get out of jail’ free card, and not prosecuting criminals for their crimes.
“Apple… tree”, I present to you the idiot manchild in Ottawa, Fidel’s foul seed, as proof positive of this claim.
Comments are closed.