LAPD Drug Bust; Trump Rally Gunman Sues County; Prop 47 Net Negative

LAPD Drug Bust

In a landmark operation, the Los Angeles Police Department has seized 50 pounds of fentanyl in a drug bust that officials are calling one of the largest in recent history. The amount of the deadly drug, which was confiscated during a narcotics investigation near Downtown Los Angeles, is estimated to be worth over $4 million on the street. According to authorities, this quantity of fentanyl would be enough to kill the entire population of Los Angeles, highlighting the severity of the drug’s presence in the community.

Police arrested one man, whom officers believe to be a major figure in the distribution of fentanyl across the city. While the suspect’s identity has not yet been released, LAPD investigators have indicated that the arrest marks a significant step in disrupting a dangerous drug network that has been flooding the area with illegal narcotics.

Fentanyl, a synthetic opioid that is 50 to 100 times stronger than morphine, has been responsible for a surge in overdose deaths across the country. In recent years, Los Angeles has seen a growing number of fatal overdoses linked to fentanyl, making this operation a critical success in the city’s ongoing battle against the opioid crisis.

Trump Rally Gunman Sues County

Vem Miller, the man arrested outside a Trump rally in California last Saturday, has filed a defamation lawsuit against the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. The lawsuit comes after Sheriff Chad Bianco publicly claimed that his deputies had “probably” thwarted a third assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.

Miller, 49, is contesting those claims, alleging that Bianco fabricated the assassination threat to portray himself as a “heroic” sheriff who protected the former president. Miller, who describes himself as both a Trump supporter and an independent journalist, is not facing any federal charges related to the incident.

The lawsuit accuses the sheriff’s department of damaging Miller’s reputation through false statements and seeks to hold the department accountable for what Miller asserts is an unjustified narrative surrounding his arrest.

Prop 47 Net Negative

A new report has cast doubt on the effectiveness of Proposition 47, a criminal justice reform passed in California ten years ago. The study, conducted by the Manhattan Institute, a conservative research group, suggests that the proposition, which reduced penalties for several non-violent crimes, may have led to an increase in both crime and drug use.

In Riverside County, one of the largest in the state, the findings show a rise in repeat offenses, including more serious crimes, and a higher number of offenders failing to appear in court. The report also notes an increase in the issuance of warrants, more plea deals leading to dismissed cases, and ongoing struggles with drug and theft-related crimes.

The reclassification of crimes under Prop 47 has led to a significant drop in felony cases—about 32%—but misdemeanor offenses have surged by over 47%. Critics argue that the reform may have unintentionally contributed to more lenient handling of repeat offenders, complicating efforts to address public safety concerns.

SF Recycling Program Criticized

San Francisco’s BottleBank pilot program, launched to streamline recycling and refund California Redemption Value (CRV) deposits, is facing mounting criticism and calls for its termination. Despite a budget of $1.42 million last year, the program has seen only 0.8% of city residents participate over the past two years, prompting concerns about its efficiency and impact.

The pilot program was introduced to replace grocery store recycling responsibilities, relieving 400 stores from accepting CRV containers. Instead, four BottleBank trucks rotate between 21 city locations, but limited operating hours and accessibility issues have made the program difficult for many residents to use. Some, like Robert Isle, find the process too inconvenient, while others remain entirely unaware of the program.

According to documents obtained by Consumer Watchdog, inefficiencies have plagued the program, with costs reaching an alarming 41 cents per nickel refunded. California’s overall container redemption rate is around 58%, but San Francisco lags far behind, with rates under 40%.

Consumer Watchdog President Jamie Court has urged Mayor London Breed to reassess the program’s viability, especially as funding continues to dwindle. However, no response has been given, and the program’s future remains uncertain.

In contrast, Los Angeles’s recycling program operates far more effectively, offering curbside collection and widespread recycling centers that make it easier for residents to redeem CRV deposits. LA’s more accessible system allows for broader participation, highlighting the shortcomings of San Francisco’s more limited and expensive approach.

California Loses Another Refinery

San Francisco’s BottleBank pilot program, launched to streamline recycling and refund California Redemption Value (CRV) deposits, is facing mounting criticism and calls for its termination. Despite a budget of $1.42 million last year, the program has seen only 0.8% of city residents participate over the past two years, prompting concerns about its efficiency and impact.

The pilot program was introduced to replace grocery store recycling responsibilities, relieving 400 stores from accepting CRV containers. Instead, four BottleBank trucks rotate between 21 city locations, but limited operating hours and accessibility issues have made the program difficult for many residents to use. Some, like Robert Isle, find the process too inconvenient, while others remain entirely unaware of the program.

According to documents obtained by Consumer Watchdog, inefficiencies have plagued the program, with costs reaching an alarming 41 cents per nickel refunded. California’s overall container redemption rate is around 58%, but San Francisco lags far behind, with rates under 40%.

Consumer Watchdog President Jamie Court has urged Mayor London Breed to reassess the program’s viability, especially as funding continues to dwindle. However, no response has been given, and the program’s future remains uncertain.

In contrast, Los Angeles’s recycling program operates far more effectively, offering curbside collection and widespread recycling centers that make it easier for residents to redeem CRV deposits. LA’s more accessible system allows for broader participation, highlighting the shortcomings of San Francisco’s more limited and expensive approach.