Parking Lot Assault

Just to preface, I am totally against any kind of violence, and feel badly about people getting beat up to the point of hospitalization, but I find it interesting how the rules are changing about keeping certain identities confidential. Tea Fire suspects, now this? So why do the police publicize Zavala's name and not the victim? And why is Zavala not referred to as a victim, because he is from Vegas? Why is that relevant in this article? Is the "victim" from SB? Call me crazy, but if someone, aka the "victim", returns to a fight with a group no less, without contacting the police, and then initiates another fight/riot by hitting someone in the back of the head first, isn't it appropriate to self-defend? Was the "victim" charged with any crime? How does the Indy get away with this kind of reporting?

It sounds like the "victim" was looking for a little payback and picked the wrong guy, why else would he return with a group and without contacting law enforcement? I guess if you're not from Santa Barbara, you lose your rights.

I would have to agree with the comment above. I also do not agree with violence, but this story just does not read right. The "victim" came back and hit someone in the back of the head???? If this story is correct, Zavala is also a victim. Yes, why only one name in this whole story???

ala News Press

majordeagan: One theory I have in response to your question is that perhaps this was a gang incident?...and of course S.B. doesn't seem to want to face up to that? Remember, it's just a theory.

As a side note, one armed person could have stopped the beating in its tracks, but of course even saying that makes me a gun nut.

I'm just making an observation..

Here here Stevesurfing2002 and BillClausen!

Thank you guys! Finally somebody else has the balls to stand up and say it.

I'm no gun nut either. In fact I'm not a nut in the least. What I am is a constitutionally protected American, looking to the safety of my 2nd Amendment rights to protect me because SBPD certainly is a bit slow on the uptake.

If a knife were pulled on me or my loved ones in Lot 10, SBPD would have had to call in for two body bags.

I'm not trying to sound like Rambo but enough is enough.

Defend the health, welfare, and safety of you and your loved ones at all costs, and maybe then scumbags like the ones mentioned above will think twice before pulling a knife.

I'm just sayin'!

Uh oh, I better go. I see one of our town's loyal bleeding hearts hurling a yoga mat at me.

You lose the right of being a victim when you gain the better in the fight and knock the other guy out, that is when he should have stopped. He was just piling it on anything after that. Obviously there was some heated emotions, words might have been said that we are not privy to here. And why should we be. There is a place and a time to handle this, in court and not the public court of opinion.

It always amazes me how many people squawk at something without really knowing what they are even talking about. Like Livingsb, how is SBPD responsible for what happened? "a bit slow on the uptake"?

I too find it odd that the "victim" came back w/ a group (obvious attempt @ retaliation) & hit the guy on the back of the head who then turned the tables on him & his friends, but it was the guy defending himself that got arrested. I would hope that the "victim" is in trouble as well.
As for the gang thing, well, they're nothing but domestic terrorists only out to cause pain & suffering through coercion & intimidation to law abiding citizens.
They should be rounded up, catalogued, locked up & allowed sticks & rocks to battle each other behind high walls, far from the safety of innocents.
What's worse is the scumbag attorneys that'll represent them in the court of "law" w/ threats of lawsuits against the police depts. & then leak private info to the gang members as to who brought charges against them.
When 1 of these malcreants goes to court for something my gut reaction is this: If he/she ain't guilty of the crime in the docket, they're definately guilty of something else.
Gangs are for thugs, criminals, louts, malcreants, losers & any other type of lowlife you can name.
Here's a funny 1 for you all: Does anybody remember when SB Mayor Marty Blum referred to the SBPD as "intimidating because they have guns & they're in your face!"?
So we wonder why the popo can't do enough. Start @ the Mayor's office & work your way down the list, there'd be your answer(s) :) henry

I recuse myself from commenting one way or they other on the SBPD because I don't know the details. What I *will* say is that its a whole combination of things that make up the problem. Yes, on-the-ball law enforcement is a must, but also looking honestly (as opposed to the feel-good politically correct way of doing things) at *why* gang culture, and thug culture in general is now mainstream is the biggest single contribution we as a society can make, and I have a gut feeling that Hank, SBliving, and myself probably see more or less eye-to-eye on this. The other thing is the ability for one to protect themself. Forcing society to disarm is insane because thugs prey upon those who cannot defend themselves. A generation of kids growing up in a culture where they are actually made accountable for there actions, and knowing they might die if they try to assualt/rape/kill someone because the intended victim has plans other than becoming the latest statistic, would greatly reduce these incidents.

In all likelihood, the people involved in this crime probably were not born with abnormal tendencies, but they probably learned it from their lack of upbringing which is reinforced by our overall culture.

With regard to gang culture, what's so sad is that it's a learned behavior--these kids start out being nice kids and end up violent because they are taught that this is right while our media and pop culture glorifies "urban" culture.

"I'm just making an observation.".-majordeagan-

And I think it's a good one. -Bill-

Simply put, when the core of our culture is one of irresponsibility, law enforcement alone won't solve the problem.

Some great things came out of the 1960's with regard to general civil rights but the problem was our culture rebelled and threw the baby out with the bathwater and that is why we see the gang/drug/thug/road rage culture (s) spreading throughout America while politicians wring their useless hands and won't speak out against it fearing they may lose votes.

What is interesting is that so far I see eight of us have blogged, and we all are disgusted with the way things are run, yet somehow the same old politicians get voted in time and time again. I'm hoping we are part of a growing trend. That having been said, let's make sure our collective disgust and anger doesn't turn into mob violence. Remember that once upon a time we did things differently so let's take the positive advances we've made as a society, and restore the old ways that worked.

Bill, I totally agree, but here's the problem: The scumbag criminal has more rights than their victim by law.
What's more, if that criminal gets "taken down" by an innocent victim protecting themselves & said criminal happens to be a "person of color" then you can bet every "civil rights advocacy" group from here to wherever is going to want a piece of that action.
Just look @ the case in Texas where 2 guys "of color" were breaking into a house, the neighbor came out, armed, & confronted them, they made a shifty move towards him & he shot them.
Case goes to court & the guy gets vindicated, but every "civil rights advocacy" group goes on a rampage calling the system "racist" because the protective neighbor happened to be, you guessed it, not a "person of color." The good thing is the guy is cleared of all charges.
Another thing about pop culture promoting the thug life, all's I can say is look @ where I live, Isla Vista. The majority of the population is not "of color" & comes from well to do households w/ 6 digit incomes. Yet, watch the behavior of most & you'll think you're seeing a poorly done rap video by some idiot gangsta rapper or something out of TMZ.
You knowe, I come from the "ghetto" part of Miami & let me say that most of these wannabe I.V. ghetto rats wouldn't last a day in the real thing. Besides, knowing what's there, why would 1 want to live ghetto style?
It is the "generation of entitlement" mentality that goes hand in hand w/ all this. All someone needs to do is start the spankings, that'll shock a few into reality :) henry

In the Know, with all due respect, you should consider changing your moniker..you missed my point by at least a mile. You are assuming the "victim" was not charged, whereas I feel there should be a charge and accountability for returning, not notifying law enforcement, and re-kindling the fight. To put it plainly, the "victim" has accountability as well, to whatever extent he/she was involved (how's that for non biased). The article states/implies, the "victim" went back after a previous altercation and struck FIRST...let's ponder that...at what point would you suggest he aggressor be re-categorized as a victim? Had he/she not returned, this never would've happened. An assault at the least, plus other minor misdemeanors should be considered.

Hank: About two years ago I dared to blog that in my opinion, "bilingual education" was wrong. There was a blogger back then that thought they knew everything and they decided to attack me personally by calling me a racist. Many in that situation would have wasted time insisting they were NOT racist, but instead I explained point by point how bilingual education and the paternalistic attitude behind it actually HURTS the people it is supposed to benefit.

What ensued was this person flaming at me and calling me every name in the book over the next few weeks, and I kept my cool and kept deconstructing their sophistic arguments. This person was one of those self-styled quasi-liberals who was convinced that because they were against the Republican party, they were speaking ex cathedra for all things social and just.

After spending weeks trying to throw all the mud at me and realizing they couldn't deal with the simple truth, they finally gave up and stopped blogging for a long time, and when they returned they seemed to have mellowed considerably. The final blow was when after telling me "if you want to communicate with these people so badly, why don't you go and learn Spanish", I responded with a long-winded blog in Spanish and translated it back into English. All they could say was that I was an idiot for posting the same thing twice. Ironically, this person said that I was against those people who were not "as White" as I was. (And I look a little more swarthy than not)

In short, the story I just presented is a microcosm of the mentality that we are dealing with. These people are persistant but the worst thing one can do is to back off and let them get their way. When these people say "you're racist" or "you hate women" or whatever, they need to be asked to prove their charges but most people would rather throw money at them and hope they will go away.

People have every right to challenge the opinions of others, but the tactic of calling someone a racist, a communist, a heretic or painting them with any other taboo label is something that cannot be allowed without shining the light of truth upon it.

Stay on topic boys.

"Uh oh, I better go. I see one of our town's loyal bleeding hearts hurling a yoga mat at me." - LivingInSB

I have a yoga mat and I have no problem with you carrying a gun for your protection. An armed citizenry is a polite citizenry.

http://realestate.aol.com/article/_a/st-...