Fri. Feb 3rd, 2023

In the wake of the horrific shooting in Tucson, that took six lives and left Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords terribly wounded, shouldn’t the Santa Ana City Council adopt additional security measures, with regard to those who attend our City Council meetings?

Many of those who attend our City Council meetings are given to making regular, slanderous attacks against our City Council – and to be honest more than a few of them appear to be rather unhinged.  Why wait for one of these people to show up with a gun and start shooting?  Our police department should be using hand-scanners to check each and every one of those who choose to attend a City Council meeting, before they are allowed into the Council chambers.

I would except all city staffers; elected officials; city commissioners and members of the media – actual credentialed media, not bloggers or folks who write for online publications that are not offered in print.

Look at the picture above.  I took that at a City Council meeting, right here in Santa Ana.  The guy in the background, in the blue shirt, is Charles Hart – a fellow who ran for Mayor last year.  The lady giving the angry one finger salute is actually on the board of directors of a Santa Ana Neighborhood Association!  Imagine what someone that angry might do in the future?

And check out the picture above.  This guy ran Alfredo Amezcua’s mayoral campaign – and he actually showed up to the same Council meeting that the angry lady above was at, and affixed duct tape to his mouth – to make some crazy point.  Imagine if he had brought along a Glock as well?

Show up to any Santa Ana City Council meeting and you will see these angry people sitting in the back row, or standing with their backs to the rear wall, muttering, hollering, hooting and just acting like insane people.  And many of them don’t even live in Santa Ana!  Quite frankly, I don’t feel safe around any of them.

And take a look at the comments offered up about our City Council on any of the local blogs, or media sites.  These people don’t offer any solutions – just angry rants.  It is scary to think about what these angry people might be plotting to do if left to their own devices.

In fact, click here to see an example of what I am talking about.  A veteran is just foaming at the mouth about the Santa Ana City Council – and he is claiming to have several other military veterans in his coalition.  Guess what?  That is a non-sequitur, isn’t it?  Why does it matter that this guy is a veteran?  He could be a lawyer and his slanderous attacks on our City Council would still be worrisome.  What worries me the most is that many of the past incidents of domestic terrorism here in the U.S. have been committed by, you guessed it, disturbed veterans.

Would scanning folks for weapons discourage anyone from attending a City Council meeting?  Maybe – but that might be a good thing.

One more thing – the scanning should be offered as part of the televised portion of the City Council meetings.  If one of these unhinged characters is dumb enough to try to slip a gun or a knife into the meeting, I want to make sure they do so on T.V. so we can all see them get caught, tased and dragged off in handcuffs.

By Editor

The New Santa Ana blog has been covering news, events and politics in Santa Ana since 2009.

20 thoughts on “Shouldn’t those who attend Santa Ana City Council meetings be scanned for weapons?”
  1. junior aka Mike Tardif,

    Are you opposed to higher safety standards at city meetings?

    In light of the Tucson shootings what would you suggest we do? As a regular at public meetings this helps keep you safe too.

  2. I actually agree to these new safety precautions that they are enforcing now. I would really like to go to a council meeting, to bad im only a teen.

  3. A better idea would be to have lockers installed, check your fire arm at the door with your coat. Of couse there should be NO exceptions. Even the ON DUTY officer would check his weapon’s just like everyone else.

    1. The last thing we need to do is disarm police officers. That is ill-advised. Nor should anyone else be bringing firearms anywhere near our City Hall. That should be grounds for arrest!

  4. It’s a great idea, if you want to have a chilling effect on community involvement. Freedom of speech and expression are more important than that.

    1. anon,

      I think what happened in Tucson already had that chilling effect. All we are proposing is to make sure that doesn’t happen here.

      And we are not proposing to take way anyone’s speech – we just want to make sure they don’t bring any weapons to the City Council meetings. Do you seriously want to argue with that position? Really?

  5. Yes, I believe I made it clear that I’m arguing against your position and why. In the wake of tragedies like 9/11 and Tuscon, we have a tendency to over-legislate and over-regulate at the expense of civil liberties. You, as a libertarian, should understand that more than most.

    1. anon,

      Actually I have re-registered as a Decline to State. Sadly too many Libertarians are as racist as their GOP counterparts. Not for me.

      Freedom is important but we need to act to protect our elected officials, our city staff and the public from deranged gun-toting madmen who might show up at our City Council meetings. It is a small price to pay to ensure everyone’s safety. Besides, what sane person would bring a gun or a knife to a Council meeting anyway? You have NOTHING to fear if you don’t bring a weapon with you to the meeting.

  6. …..“I would except all city staffers; elected officials; city commissioners and members of the media – actual credentialed media”

    …..“Freedom is important but…” “a small price to pay”


    Loss of Freedom, is NOT a small price.

    And how would your ??Reasonable?? Exceptions listed above stop White from shooting Moscone and Milk? (1978)

    It is just as reasonable to BAN politicians from shopping centers as a way to thwart what happened in Arizona.

    For safeties sake, why not mandate all council meeting be held NAKED? It would then be easy to see who is packing what.

    1. What loss of freedom? All we are saying is that folks should NOT bring weapons to our City Council meetings. Are you saying you want people to bring guns and knives to our Council meetings?

      Innocent people should have no problem being scanned for weapons. Only the guilty should be at all alarmed by this.

  7. Well Cook, you’ve obviously hit on the lack of logic behind this idea. Let’s face it, this is nothing more than an attempt to define critics of the Council as “dangerous” and “unhinged”. It has nothing to do with the safety of the Council.

    1. anon,

      Many of these critics have indeed been leaving angry and crazed comments on local blogs. All we are saying is why don’t we make sure these people are not bringing weapons to our City Council meetings.

      I am particularly concerned about the very angry veterans who are in this anti-Council coalition. Most of the domestic acts of terrorism in this country have in fact been conducted by disturbed veterans.

      We need to take steps to make sure that these people won’t be trying to sneak guns or knives into our City Council meetings. It is one thing for them to spit out their hatred for the Council on blogs. Let’s be sure they don’t take that any further.

  8. anon,

    Why are you against public safety?

    By adding metal detectors or having folks scanned for weapons as they enter city meetings is just increasing the security of everyone, including yourself.

    Please explain how extra security measures impede free speech as you have claimed above. There are metal detectors as you walk into the bank or before you get on a plane, do you object to those as well.

  9. Sean.

    There is nothing wrong with detectors for security, like those in the court houses, etc. Where everyone is checked.

    But when Art want s to except certain people from the scan.

    Then it is not about public safety, it is then about public intimidation.

    Even at airports, the flight crew are required to pass the same checks passenger go though.

    Note: the first “public” safety law IS the 2nd amendment.

    That is why security lockers would be a good idea.
    Then even off duty cops could come to council meetings.

  10. Cook,

    I don’t believe that Art is only wanting certain members of the public searched, in fact I am sure he believes he himself should be searched. He is just stating that certain members of our community, and many that live elsewhere, are creating a toxic environment which could lead to some sort of violence.

    I believe that everyone entering should be scanned with the exception of law enforcement. This will increase safety and security for all of us and our elected officials. That is a good thing. Don’t you agree?

    I disagree with you that security lockers would be a good idea. We should not be encouraging anyone to bring weapons to city meetings and that is exactly what such lockers would do. With the exception of law enforcement, nobody needs to have a weapon with them at a city meeting.

  11. If everything is so great in Santa Ana and the city council is doing such a great job, why worry about someone bringing weapons? Pedroza has an obsession with people being dragged away in handcuffs.

    1. cook,

      I don’t see a reason to scan our elected officials, city staffers or cops. But I am OK with scanning everyone else, particularly the unruly folks in the back row.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Verified by MonsterInsights