DOJ Appointments by AG Harris

[RP1911]

http://blogs.sacbee.com/the_state_worker/2011/06/kamala-harris-names-jus.html

Link fixed. Thanks Glock22Fan.

[SoCal Bob]

I get a "404 - not found" when I click on the link.

[Glock22Fan]

Link gives "404 - not found."

Try this one.

All from LAPD, Orange County SD and (three) from San Francisco (can you say "jobs for the brown-noses?"). All from "leftie" areas, none (if we ignore Carona's reign) from pro-gun areas.

I guess that's about what we expected.

[RP1911]

Sorry tried to type the link using cell phone.

[POLICESTATE]

Obviously appointing people from more urban counties where they have all sorts of crime, and lots of it, makes the most sense. Never mind that their track record might stink, evidence being the fact these counties have all sorts of crime and lots of it.

[uyoga]

" . . . . known by the company we keep . . . . "

[Glock22Fan]

Obviously appointing people from more urban counties where they have all sorts of crime, and lots of it, makes the most sense. Never mind that their track record might stink, evidence being the fact these counties have all sorts of crime and lots of it.

I'm not sure whether this is sarcasm or not, but as there isn't a smiley, I'll assume it isn't.

I'm not sure, if so, that this follows completely, although I can see the superficial logic.

I believe that the population split is something like 50:50 between urban and rural population. Are you saying that the 50% rural areas have to be governed by 100% urban law enforcement, because only they know how to control crime? (hint, they don't do that good a job, do they?)

It is surely not appropriate to base rural law enforcement and DoJ guidance on totally urban practice. To be representative of the state as a whole, there should surely be officials representative of the different demographics.

How are you going to get a neutral (or representitive) view on, say, CCW from the DoJ if every official has the lefty urban attitude?

Name me a big city CoP or D.A. who is known to support the 2nd.

Totally what I'd expect from Kamala, perhaps, but not very democratic.

[BigDogatPlay]

Some of the blog comments in the linked article are a bit.... catty?

But seriously... her own chief deputy for investigations from SFDA (although what is a "San Francisco Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement"????), and a bunch of past union presidents.

To be expected, sadly.

[POLICESTATE]

I'm not sure whether this is sarcasm or not, but as there isn't a smiley, I'll assume it isn't.

I'm not sure, if so, that this follows completely, although I can see the superficial logic.

I believe that the population split is something like 50:50 between urban and rural population. Are you saying that the 50% rural areas have to be governed by 100% urban law enforcement, because only they know how to control crime? (hint, they don't do that good a job, do they?)

It is surely not appropriate to base rural law enforcement and DoJ guidance on totally urban practice. To be representative of the state as a whole, there should surely be officials representative of the different demographics.

How are you going to get a neutral (or representitive) view on, say, CCW from the DoJ if every official has the lefty urban attitude?

Name me a big city CoP or D.A. who is known to support the 2nd.

Totally what I'd expect from Kamala, perhaps, but not very democratic.

I was being sarcastic, forgot the smiley though. Oh well. Yeah I think the idea of LEO representation in the DOJ being mostly from urban areas is ridiculous.

[CHS]

I believe that the population split is something like 50:50 between urban and rural population. Are you saying that the 50% rural areas have to be governed by 100% urban law enforcement, because only they know how to control crime? (hint, they don't do that good a job, do they?)

Given the size of the Bay Area (Oakland/Berkeley, SF, San Jose), Los Angeles (Ventura to Long Beach), Orange County, San Diego, and Sacramento, I highly doubt the population split is anywhere close to 50:50 in California.

The urban politicians RUN this state.

[Librarian]

State has 37.5 million as of Jan 2011. See http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/

Top 10 cities (LA, SD, SJ, SF, Fresno, Sacramento, Long Beach, Oakland, Bakersfield, Anaheim) have 9.4 million. Top 20, 11.8 million.

But this table http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demog...et_Version.xls
says things like ~10% of Alameda county lives outside of some city limit, Contra Costa 16%, Fresno 17%, Humboldt 53%, Imperial 21%, Los Angeles 10%, Orange 3%, Riverside 20%, San Bernardino 14%, San Diego 16%. We look VERY urbanized.

[vincewarde]

So what do we know about the person running the Bureau of Firearms? A quick look at their website does not even reveal who is in charge.

[CHS]

State has 37.5 million as of Jan 2011. See http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/

Top 10 cities (LA, SD, SJ, SF, Fresno, Sacramento, Long Beach, Oakland, Bakersfield, Anaheim) have 9.4 million. Top 20, 11.8 million.

But this table http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demog...et_Version.xls
says things like ~10% of Alameda county lives outside of some city limit, Contra Costa 16%, Fresno 17%, Humboldt 53%, Imperial 21%, Los Angeles 10%, Orange 3%, Riverside 20%, San Bernardino 14%, San Diego 16%. We look VERY urbanized.

We really have to look at populations by county though. LA County, for example has at least 20-30 cities or more. All that adds up. The population in LA County ALONE is 9.8 million people. That trumps the top 10 cities by itself (and only includes a couple of the top 10 cities).

Orange County again has another 20'ish cities at least and 3 million people.

So. Add LA and Orange to: SF, Alameda, Contra Costa and San Mateo and you're already well past 50% of the population.

This has always been, in my opinion, one of the CRITICAL reasons why California is so anti-gun. Most states have a fairly gun-friendly rural population to balance out the anti-gun wackjobs that come from urban areas. That balance just DOES NOT EXIST in California.

[Glock22Fan]

Well, I guess I wasn't trying to make a mathematically correct statement, but I believe I am approximately right in saying that there is a roughly even split between Republicans and Democrats, but the way they are distributed makes the cities disproportionally Democratic.

[wildhawker]

Well, I guess I wasn't trying to make a mathematically correct statement, but I believe I am approximately right in saying that there is a roughly even split between Republicans and Democrats, but the way they are distributed makes the cities disproportionally Democratic.

Here's the most recent data from SOS: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ror/...-11/county.xls