Los Angeles

Husband of Embattled Los Angeles D.A. Pulls Gun on Protesters at Their Door

District Attorney Jackie Lacey faces re-election today against a tough field calling for more criminal justice reforms.

|

When you're an elected official who is accused of turning your back on police misconduct and supporting overly harsh criminal justice policies that target minorities, pulling a gun on Black Lives Matters protesters who show up at your house is perhaps not the best look one day before an election.

Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey wasn't the person who pulled the gun. It was her husband, David. Still, it's pretty much the last image of the Lacey campaign that L.A. voters are left with as they head to the polls today.

Lacey, who faces a very tough re-election vote, has faced protesters who believe she hasn't brought nearly enough reform as a prosecutor to Los Angeles County. Critics are also upset that she continues to support the death penalty. Furthermore, she's under attack for failing to hold law enforcement agents accountable for misconduct and shootings, including in a 2015 case where former LAPD Chief Charlie Beck recommended charges against an officer who killed a homeless man in Venice. Lacey declined to bring those charges.

Dissatisfaction with Lacey's approach drew San Francisco D.A. George Gascón to resign from his position in October and challenge her for the Los Angeles position. (In January, San Francisco voters selected deputy public defender and reformer Chesa Boudin to office rather than Mayor London Breed's interim replacement.)

Black Lives Matter activists have been protesting Lacey regularly and working toward her defeat today. On Monday they showed up at her home. When some of those activists knocked on her door, David answered. He was armed and pointed his gun at them. "I will shoot you," he told them. "Get off of my porch."

In the video of the incident, you can hear drumming after he closes the door on them. Then somebody yells, "We're here for the community meeting, Jackie Lacey," as though that's a thing that was actually going to happen at that time of day, even if she were amenable. The gun obviously didn't scare them that much.

Lacey has complained about being harassed and receiving threats in the past. The Los Angeles Times reports that a group of 30 protesters arrived before dawn Monday at her home, in an attempt to force an awkward confrontation that could then be used against her, which seems to be exactly what happened.

For her part, Lacey has used these confrontations as an excuse for pulling back from participation in some debates and to avoid meeting with Black Lives Matter activists.

It is, of course, "bad optics" for Lacey's husband to pull a gun on her critics, though some voters will probably respect his grumpy "Get off my porch" response—minus the gun. Lacey has apologized for the incident but has also complained that it's not "fair or right for protesters to show up at the home of people who dedicate their lives to public service."

NEXT: The Afghanistan Deal Is Already Falling Apart

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Yeah, fuck off. A mob shows up pounding on my door at that time of morning, I’d better be in a good mood if you expect me to give you a warning first.

    1. Yup. Even if I disagree with her politics, even if I think she’s evil, she still has the right to be secure in her home. If you invite yourself over to trespass on their property, you’d better be ready to have a gun pointed at you.

      1. Is walking up to a front door (assuming there aren’t any “No Trespassing” signs visible) without defeating any fences or barriers trespassing?

        I don’t know the layout, but at most homes like this the front porch is where visitors, UPS, FedEx, USPS, Girl Scouts, strangely dressed individuals (on October 31), and Mormons routinely set foot w/little protest by the homeowner.

        Had he answered the door holding a firearm but not brandishing it and told the individuals to leave immediately and never return or he would call the police and/or make a citizen’s arrest for trespassing, his behavior would have been appropriate. As it was, it was not appropriate.

        1. 30 people showing up uninvited, pounding on your door? To a house where the resident has already received (allegedly) death threats?

          It’s worth noting that none of your examples are the types that tend to show up before dawn.

          Maybe he was a bit too quick to grab for the gun, but it’s better to have it and not need it than the alternative.

          1. I don’t think simply having the firearm in hand was the complaint here. Pointing it at the trespassers was probably where the line ended up behind him.

            Aside from any complaints, this is a prosecutor who apparently is on the cop’s side no matter what. They can’t have units watching her house after reported threats?

        2. Is walking up to a front door (assuming there aren’t any “No Trespassing” signs visible) without defeating any fences or barriers trespassing?

          Yes. The sign is irrelevant. Now, I may be in a good mood and consider the reason you’re entering my property uninvited sufficient to grant you retro-active consent, but it was still trespassing.

          I get along with the local JW missionaries but if 30 of them show up early in the morning, yelling at me . . .

        3. California trespass law:
          602(k) Entering any lands, whether unenclosed or enclosed by fence, for the purpose of injuring any property or property rights or with the intention of interfering with, obstructing, or injuring any lawful business or occupation carried on by the owner of the land, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession.
          602(o) long mostly failing to leave when ordered

          1. “for the purpose of injuring any property or property rights”

            I wonder if this would include going onto someone’s property with the intent of remaining even if they tell you to get off?

            Did the BLM people, in fact, leave the property once the owner confronted them?

        4. “UPS, FedEx, USPS, Girl Scouts, strangely dressed individuals (on October 31), and Mormons”

          To the best of my knowledge, these folks tend to come to people’s homes during the *day,* not at night, and certainly not as part of an angry, chanting mob.

          I’d be open to a properly-drafted law drawing a distinction between the girl scouts, etc. on the one hand and angry mobs on the other. I presume that careful legal draftsmanship could in theory draw a line.

          1. Halloween being an exception which is actually carved out, for example, in mask statutes.

        5. you are an idiot

        6. Displaying a firearm in a visible manner for the purpose of unlawful intimidation is brandishing in many jurisdictions. He went one step beyond and actually pointed it directly at someone – that would get most people an even more serious charge of assault.

    2. It’s your duty and obligation to allow yourself to be accosted, assaulted, battered, or even killed by a bunch of chimping out race rioters. Free minds and free markets baby! WOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

  2. Thanks for such and amazing article. Also, visit: Whatsapp Plus Apk

    1. Probably more viruses in that than in a 55 year old down-market hooker.

      1. damnit, I was sipping coffee when I read that…now I have to clean my laptop

  3. protesting where someone lives crosses a line.

    1. The far far left has been doing this for years. Elected officials, political appointees, media figures, corporate executives, etc.

    2. If it’s a scumbag prosecutor? Meh. They “cross the line” everyday as part of their job.

      1. There’s always someone invoking the “bad person exception” to legal rights – but if they can do it to a prosecutor, then they’ll be able to do it with a media personality, etc., etc.

    3. In the street adjacent to their property, fine. On their porch, that’s trespassing.

      1. Notice this shit didn’t happen in a state with some version of Castle Doctrine. In a lot of the country, that man would’ve been justified in doing a lot more than just showing them his gun.

        1. I doubt it. You can’t shoot people for ringing your doorbell and then not leaving the moment you tell them to. Even in Texas.

          1. You’re correct. California actually has good self-defense laws. I’m not familiar with the laws of every state, but the laws there are as good as I’ve heard of anywhere in the country, and better than most.

            Now, if the “activists” had broken through the door (as “activists” have been known to do in other cases), _then_ he could legally have immediately shot them.

        2. Around here you can legally shoot trespassers if they are committing another crime as well.

        3. No, he really wouldn’t. And I say this as a dude who would have sympathy with the guy if he’d pulled the trigger. But it would still have been an over-reaction and justifiably illegal.

          Pointing the gun was, IMO, uncalled for. Having it, threatening to shoot . . . yeah, ok.

        4. California follows the Castle Doctrine which applies if they’re inside your home or trying to enter it. So no, you don’t get to brandish your weapon or start shooting if they’re on your front porch and not trying to break into your home.

      2. ^

        No matter how wrong she is, protestors aren’t right when they violate property rights.

    4. Unless the taxpayers pay for the house directly.

  4. Lawless mob. You never see BLM protest or change anything going on in their own violence inflicted communities.

  5. Politics aside, if a bunch of angry random strangers shows up on my door, I’m definitely going to have my firearms in my periph.

    1. On the other hand, it’s good to see the DA and her family fully support the 2nd amendment.

      1. Fully, or just for her family?

        1. I’d be very curious to know her position on this.

          So curious, I’m also curious why it wasn’t covered in the article.

          1. I mean, I’m assuming she has a pretty established record about this issue.

          2. She’s the DA in _Los Angeles_. If she’d refused to prosecute people for breaking unconstitutional gun control laws, we’d definitely have heard about it. However, the gun belonged to her and not her husband, her position isn’t relevant here.

            1. Probably. But you’re still making an assumption, particularly for this specific issue.

              And I live in Michigan. I pay as little attention to shit going on in California as possible. I rarely even click on articles here about it.

              Do you not think that an article about a DA who’s husband pulled a gun on people on his property should at least address her position on it, without requiring us making those assumptions?

    2. I’m not so sure pointing and threatening to shoot like that is such a good idea; wouldn’t lesser mortals be carted off and charged with brandishing? I’ve gotten the really clear impression that just pointing when he obviously didn’t need to shoot is not legal in California.

      1. No reasonable prosecutor…

      2. I’m not so sure pointing and threatening to shoot like that is such a good idea; wouldn’t lesser mortals be carted off and charged with brandishing?

        When an angry mob is standing at your door at oh-dark-thirty? I’m not sure.

        I’ve gotten the really clear impression that just pointing when he obviously didn’t need to shoot is not legal in California.

        I’m not sure that’s a law anywhere. If you feel threatened, merely pointing a gun without shooting is not necessarily a crime.

        1. The mob was not threatening. They didn’t have knives and guns and pitchforks, not even tar and feathers.

          It’s one thing to come to the door with a gun in your belt, or even in hand and pointed down. Another thing entirely to point, with your finger on the trigger, and threaten to shoot somebody.

          What’s the gun safety rule? Never point your gun at something unless you want to destroy it.

          1. I don’t know if the mob was threatening or not, the video shows only one perspective.

            They didn’t have knives and guns and pitchforks, not even tar and feathers.

            We don’t know if they had knives and guns and pitchforks. It’s reasonable to presume they didn’t have pitchforks… because… let’s face it, this is BLM we’re talking about. But knives and guns can be concealed. We don’t even know how many there were unless there are other videos showing the crowd.

            What’s the gun safety rule? Never point your gun at something unless you want to destroy it.

            As a long time, experienced gun nut, I know this rule very well, but that doesn’t mean you pull the trigger every time you point your gun at something. This isn’t feudal Samurai society where culture compels if you draw your weapon, you must draw blood.

            Context is everything and with the limited I have access to here, it seems like he might have gone a little far in waving the firearm at people. But it wasn’t my door that was being accosted in the pre-dawn hours. It’s also not my door that has a long history of being accosted by protesters who are looking to… “attempt to force an awkward confrontation”.

            If the BLM protesters really feel that they were in the right here, they can file a police report and indicate they were assaulted by the DA’s husband.

            Bottom line, protesters of whatever political stripe need to stop accosting people in their homes in the dark of night. That’s the ground zero of bad optics.

          2. Never aim at anything you don’t intend to shoot.

            Never shoot anything you don’t intend to kill…

          3. so you are saying you could tell what weapons the mob had through the door? interesting

  6. If she loses, she’ll want to prosecute him, but won’t be able to.
    If she wins, she’ll be able to prosecute him, but won’t want to.

  7. “Lacey has apologized for the incident but has also complained that it’s not “fair or right for protesters to show up at the home of people who dedicate their lives to public service.”

    This cracks me up. Oh the hypocrisy! Let me see if I have this straight. The husband of a Democrat District Attorney says that “it’s no right or fair for protesters to show up at the home of people who dedicate their lives to public service.”. but, it is OK for protesters to hound Republicans who are out in public, or to protest at the homes of Republicans. Give me a break.

    1. “public service”

    2. Or to have the state show up, uninvited, to kick in the door of peaceful people and that somehow is “legitimate” and “law enforcement.”

      If I can’t come on your property, I can’t grant that authority to others.

    3. She was just so shocked she hadn’t managed to lock all of those people up, too. Or have her little cronies at LAPD shoot them first.

  8. Smart man

    1. And good for him. No matter how controversial his wife is, he doesn’t deserve to have people disrupting his life at home by crowding his porch and banging on his door.

      It honestly takes an extreme level of assholery to make me sympathize with an asshole prosecutor when her husband threatened people with a firearm, but they managed it.

      1. I am bit at a loss at how it is “good optics” for BLM to protesting at a private home and knocking on their door. That should be very bad form.

        1. Did you miss that this is Commiefornia, where they have all but abolished the notion of personal property.

        2. Well, they tricked hapless reporters into describing this as a gaffe for the DA’s husband. So looks like the optics worked out pretty well, from a media perspective.

  9. So the black DA is supporting policies that deliberately target minority neighborhoods? While police reform maybe needed, just perhaps Black Lived Matter’s racialist theory on why there are problems with law enforcement are ill conceived.

    1. Mickey, your statement is dead in the water and will not go any where regardless of its truth.

    2. It’s like how Baltimore was a racist hotbed with a white-systemic-racist superstructure. Yet the mayor, DA, city counsel, top LEO, etc. were all black.

  10. Get off of my porch!

    Eastwood/Lacey 2020

  11. If Jackie Lacey and husband was of a different ethnic group hubby would now be in jail! and BLM would be marching up and down in front of and on their property.

  12. Hmm if I had a mob at my door I don’t know if I’d open the door for them even with my gun in hand. If I did I would keep the gun back out of reach.

  13. “Blue on Blue! Don’t Shoot!”

    Enjoy Every Sandwich has it right: mob at my door, why answer the door at all? Call the cops to disperse the mob. They break in the door, or otherwise put me in fear of serious bodily harm…then things go differently.

  14. She is defending those who take the lives of little black girls, THEIR lives don’t matter — better optic defending thugs.

    A man, defending his woman — I know who I choose to defend.

  15. Remember that these protesters are rabid leftists. Do I support similar criminal justice reforms as they do? Probably. But I respect the results of elections as well. The fact that Lacey was elected DA means she was the preferred choice of that past election. If they don’t like her policies, vote her out. Don’t harass her at her home and threaten her for cheap political stunts and then act offended when someone defends their private property rights.

    When these leftists stoop to this level to attack Lacey, remember that they’re really attacking us, the people. Most of us don’t live in LA and I’m sure those who do may very well have voted for someone else, but when you don’t respect elections, you’re really disrespecting the people who voted. Fundamental opposition to the will of the voters is authoritarianism, plain and simple.

    1. Especially when the election is literally the next day :/

  16. Why does BLM not post video of the protestors behavior in the minutes leading up to this?
    Because it would likely show Lacey’s husband in a good light being fairly restrained.

  17. “The Los Angeles Times reports that a group of 30 protesters arrived before dawn Monday at her home, in an attempt to force an awkward confrontation that could then be used against her, which seems to be exactly what happened.”

    OK, just for a moment assume these were white Proud Boys. (I’m not saying the Proud Boys would pull a stunt like this, because if they did the media would have highlighted it. But let’s just go with my hypothetical.)

    Mob of white people come at night onto the property of a black person, the black person waves a gun and tells them to back off…who do you think would be getting the sympathetic treatment?

  18. I don’t know about LA but in the California town I live in its legal to walk around my property with a gun. I can point it in most any direction and if some one on my property gets in front of it am I brandishing? I’m sure the law says yes however

  19. Just report the facts of the incident, Mr. Shackleford. Please don’t tell us – the readers -what to think. We can decide if Mr. Lacey’s action is “bad optics” or “not the best look one day before an election.” Would two days be acceptable? And why start the opinion as if Ms. Lacey had brandished the pistol, only to reverse in the second? In sales tactics, known as “bait and switch”.

  20. From the looks of the responses to that twitter post, I’d say she gained votes from this.

  21. He did the right thing by pointing the gun. A gun pointed at the ground doesn’t do much good when a possible assailant is a foot in front of your face. Also, this man seems to be aware that”anti-lynching” laws are only effective post- facto.

  22. Commenter Ken Hagler is the one who has it right.
    California actually has excellent self defense laws.
    Go ahead and blast away once they force the door and enter the house. I recommend a semi auto pistol caliber carbine like a CZ Scorpion or HK MP 5 clone in 9mm with a 30 round magazine
    However, you cannot shoot people for simple trespassing.
    The porch and grounds are “curtilage” and are not considered highly defensible property like the inside of the house.
    Pointing the gun at people on your porch in order to reinforce you ordering them to leave is a crime.
    My suggestion is to not open your door to a mob before dawn.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.