San Diego, CA
San Diego region’s gun violence prevention efforts getting $4.2 million boost
The San Diego region just got a $4.2 million boost to expand gun violence prevention efforts through court orders designed to quickly get guns out of the hands of people who pose a threat.
The money from two state grants will go to outreach and education about civil court orders, including gun violence restraining orders, that require people who are alleged to be dangerous to turn over their firearms. The funding will also be used to create a task force to enforce those court orders.
San Diego is the most active user of gun violence restraining orders in the state. At a news conference Tuesday at the San Diego Police Department downtown, Attorney General Rob Bonta said the city has “truly been a model for how to use evidence-based, data-driven solutions that work that prevent firearm violence from happening in the first place.”
“It’s also been an exemplary policy and approach that others can learn from,” Bonta said.
Gun violence restraining orders, or GVROs, are judge-approved civil court orders intended for crisis intervention. They require a person to surrender or sell their firearms and bar the person from having guns or ammunition for the duration of the order, which can last up to five years.
Supporters of such orders hail them as a vital public safety measure to intervene in dangerous behavior. Critics disparage them as overreach and an affront to the Second Amendment.
City Attorney Mara Elliott has championed gun violence restraining orders, and her office said Tuesday it has obtained more of them than any other city in the nation. Law enforcement working with the San Diego City Attorney’s Office have seized more than 3,700 guns using the orders.
Elliott said the grant money “will lead to one of the most significant expansions of gun violence prevention work in California” since the state law creating them was passed, prompted by the 2014 mass shooting near UC Santa Barbara that killed six people.
Of the new funding coming to the region, $2 million from the state’s Judicial Council will go toward a new Firearms Relinquishment Task Force to enforce court orders intended to disarm people alleged to pose a threat. The task force met for the first time last week.
The remaining $2.2 million, from the California Department of Justice, will go toward law enforcement training and public education about gun violence restraining orders and other court orders designed to separate a person from firearms. That money will go to the San Diego City Attorney’s Office.
Tuesday’s announcement of increased funding comes little more than six weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of removing firearms from certain dangerous people such as domestic violence suspects, the City Attorney’s Office noted in a news release. It added that California is “doubling down” on using court orders to disarm people who pose a threat.
The state’s gun violence restraining order law went into effect in 2016. From then to the end of last year, two California counties account for 44 percent of all such orders — Santa Clara and San Diego, according to a report that Bonta’s Office of Gun Violence Protection issued in June.
San Diego County also had “by far the highest number” of gun violence restraining orders made into “permanent” orders, which can last up to five years, during that same eight-year stretch, the report stated — 35 percent of all the long-term orders in California were issued in San Diego.
Gun violence restraining orders are often obtained very quickly after an incident or threat. They start as temporary 21-day orders, followed by a court hearing for a judge to consider extending them.
Many of those do not turn into long-term orders, and it’s not uncommon for the temporary order to be dissolved. Sometimes deals are struck to handle cases through less restrictive means, and people can get their weapons back sooner.
California has nine types of court orders that can remove guns from people, including in cases alleging domestic violence, workplace violence or civil harassment. The report from Bonta’s office states that gun violence restraining orders accounted for 1 percent of the orders issued with firearm provisions in 2023.
Originally Published:
San Diego, CA
More Thoughts on ‘Yes on A’
By Dave Rice
Is Measure A going to affect a significant number of properties? Is it going to affect affordable housing in any meaningful way? Come now, let’s not be dense – this hits a handful of rich people who can absolutely afford to drop $10K in the city coffers if they’re leaving a vacation home vacant on purpose – let’s say that’s their civic contribution that would be realized in other ways if they actually lived, worked, and shopped here full-time.
Or it hits STVR hosts, who can either factor the cost into their business model or give it up if margins are really that thin (maybe not everyone needs to fancy themselves an amateur hotelier). But let’s not kid ourselves and believe the kind of housing this will free up will be plentiful or affordable.
In the exceedingly rare instances where someone might be eligible for an exemption, will it be too hard to apply for? That’s something we can argue and refine but that’s the bathwater, or just the little bit of it that splashes out of the tub, not the baby. An argument that the whole proposal is DOA because military members are too stupid to file for an exemption is either dismissive of or telling tales out of school about what we really think of military intelligence.
Poor, poor grandma who needs a home near her doctor? If she’s really poor why does she have multiple houses, and if she’s not does this really affect her? I live in a neighborhood where “aren’t you afraid you’re going to get shot?” is the first thing outsiders ask me about where I’m from, and if Grandma has owned her mostly-unoccupied vacation house for any significant time I probably pay a lot more property tax than she does. You couldn’t trip over the limbo bar to gain my sympathy, it’s buried a few feet deep.
This is a tiny nod toward taxing the rich, but that’s all. It’s not significant or meaningful, it won’t do a lot, most of the housing stock in question even if returned to actual residents won’t make a dent in the astronomical cost of living in or anywhere near this city. But it’s a tiny step in the right direction – and watching how hysterical the moneyed class is about the rest of us asking for even the tiniest drop in the goddamned bucket we’re trying to fill without their help is telling.
Related
San Diego, CA
Annual Rock ’n’ Roll races bring 30,000 runners to San Diego streets
Skip to content
Contact Us
San Diego, CA
Dining Out — series Part 1: A look at the evolution of La Jolla’s restaurant scene
This is the first installment in a series of stories on the history of dining out in La Jolla, how it’s changed and how it continues to evolve.
It’s hard to imagine La Jolla without its restaurants, from the lines stretching down the block at The Taco Stand to the iconic views at George’s at the Cove.
But the way La Jollans eat and where has changed dramatically since the area’s founding in the 1800s.
In this first part of the new month-long series “Dining Out,” the La Jolla Light looks at local restaurants from the 1880s (when La Jolla was first developed and settled) to the early 1920s.
“La Jolla had very few people at that time,” according to local historian Carol Olten. “There weren’t a lot of restaurants, as far as we know.”
Olten said she gets information about La Jolla’s earliest days from the diaries of local pioneer Anson Mills.
“He kept track of where he went and what he did … but he did a lot of home cooking,” she said. “So when they went to a restaurant for dinner, it was a big occasion. It was something people mainly did on holidays or … a social occasion.”
One restaurant Mills would go to — believed to be one of the first in La Jolla — was Montezuma Cottage. Olten said it is believed to have opened in 1895 near the intersection of Prospect and Jenner streets.
Mills described the restaurant as a popular eating and gathering spot for locals and tourists, Olten said. He wrote an entry about a Thanksgiving dinner there with about 60 people.
Montezuma Cottage later became known as the Seaside Inn and Ocean View restaurant. It was torn down in 1931.
Culturally, eating at a restaurant was a more formal occasion at the time, Olten said.
“You didn’t go to a restaurant just to hang out with friends like you would today. It was purposeful then,” she said.
Around 1900, a restaurant known as the White Rabbit opened near the corner of Girard Avenue and Prospect Street. In addition to a rooftop garden, it featured a tea room, joining a national trend.
“Tea rooms went with the suffragette movement because in those days, [women] didn’t have a place to gather without an escort, so tea rooms started opening in hotels and women could go there and sit down and have a social tea or lunch,” Olten said. “La Jolla got in on the tail end of that thanks to [Green Dragon Colony founder] Anna Held and [La Jolla philanthropist] Ellen Browning Scripps.”
One of them, called The Cricket, opened in the early 1900s with white tablecloths. Olten said it was near what it is now Eddie V’s restaurant.
“It was originally part of the Green Dragon Colony … and was sold to a British woman named Daisy Mitchell,” she said. “It stayed a tea room for many years, and she kept a guest book that was decorated with reds and greens and had a medieval theme. So it was very British.”
Joining a trend toward more upscale dining, one of La Jolla’s “most well-established and well-known restaurants” opened in 1912 at 1227 Prospect St. The Brown Bear had “stylish, fashionable service and a menu to please the gods,” Olten said.
A house specialty was Welsh rabbit served in a silver chafing dish. The restaurant was in operation until 1941.
Several restaurants opened around 1915, about the same time as the Panama-California Exposition, a world’s fair-type event held in 1915-16 that brought 3.7 million people to San Diego.
One of La Jolla’s new restaurants, the Spindrift Inn, opened in 1916 and was considered a “last stop” out of town.
“Most restaurants at that time were located in the immediate Village area,” Olten said. “The one that was astray would have been the Spindrift Inn [in La Jolla Shores]. This was in the very early days of automobiles, so not very many people had cars, but those that did would … drive their cars and the last stop before you got out of town was Spindrift Inn.”
The Spindrift Inn later became The Marine Room, which still stands.
Olten said the restaurant was operated by the Hannay family for about 20 years. Their “rambunctious” fox terrier, Jiggs, would roam the dining room.
Another Expo-era restaurant was the Dining Car, which operated in an old trolley car parked near Goldfish Point. Dinner was $2 per person. It burned down on Halloween night in 1923.
Next installment: With new hotels being built in La Jolla in the 1920s came new hotel restaurants. But later, World War II would have an impact on La Jollans and San Diegans in general and on where and how they ate. ♦
-
Maine2 minutes ago‘Malicious gossip’: Wife of Senate candidate Graham Platner responds to texting claims
-
Maryland7 minutes agoYour Voice Your Future | Town Hall
-
Michigan14 minutes agoFifth Third Bank to close 75 Michigan branches, including former Comerica locations
-
Massachusetts17 minutes agoWinners’ circle: Tracking every 2026 spring high school championship – The Boston Globe
-
Minnesota22 minutes agoMinnesota Medicaid crisis: Thousands of care providers cut off from funding after state revalidation deadline
-
Mississippi29 minutes agoMississippi LB Devontray Brewer committed to Stanford and broke down his decision
-
Missouri32 minutes ago
Kansas City, Missouri, police investigating Monday evening homicide near 12th, Askew
-
Montana37 minutes agoWeather Wise: A rare storm for Montana