'Intent on causing trouble' that's hilarious - it could have been
stopped if Shoreline had followed through on their procedues to
search everyone. I've been to tamer concerts where they searched
everyone up and down. It seemed as is Shoreline staff was
even afraid to deal with the trouble makers. To see those poor
cadets or reserve officers by the restrooms and the big gunned high paid PD outside was an even a bigger hoot not to mention the Parole officers who were waiting outside with PD. Wonder if the INS
showed up. I had to leave early because my lawn seats were taken over by groups who decided not to watch but fight during the show.
What a disappointment of security on both Shoreline and PD's part.
Once the 5 or 6pm fight started they should have brought in PD presence up top of the lawn. Instead the have these idiots of security asking if you're in the right seat and you have VIP ticketing!
I watched as the big rude security guy asked a couple to show their
ticket in VIP all because he couldn't read that the couple he was trying to sit had seating at another VIP section. Also if you had VIP you missed the first act because the flunky catering service didn't open up until the first act started!
big disappointment all around.

Why go to THAT?

WAR and whatever have been around since Nixon did the wiretaps and crooked up AC all the way, to ZZ and back, and the Golden State Warriors didn't win an NBA title until Dick I removed the troops, which went down under RICK, not Tricky but Barry, in 1974.

The corporations and their actors are deadly and of death. You are supposed to never find out, they want all the money they can get because a WWIII is really, really likely, so why sing another song and describe the riot of Abraham, unless you are Bob Dylan?

Of course, when the economy goes South because the Newsies won't report how the fat power got deregulated deals going in 2001 and IT INCITED 9/11 AND GUARANTEED THE COLLAPSE OF CALIFORNIA, no Newsies seem ready to really report how they should have named the power deal geeks, as profiteers, with the interest usurers, during time of WAR!

Good God, ya'all. What were YOU good for?

You warriors at song note, Isaiah 20:5 describes how Jews are from ETHIOPIA, so before a military target gets hit, put a sock in Pelosi's flanner.

WATERBOARDING for Israel or for Bushwicks who flip depleted uranium shooting galleries and leave Saddam to start another fight will cause a TSUNAMI, hello Lady GaGa, singing like WaWa with bobbing stuff, all the way up to several hundred feet high!

When you incite TERROR ATTACKS, and sing about it, you are a deadly NARCISSIST. Stabbings? So what! Here comes the foam and poppers, in the Atlantic and maybe in the Marianas' Trench. WAR! Good God!

What is it good for? The Obama regime, which tried to lose the Presidential election to Joe the Plumber and coughed up Janet's Governorship of Arizona and Prop. 8, but look at the nose on that Bam Margeram, and how Steve O looks like Ari did Rahm in a test-tube, Mike Emanuel did himself and begat JOHNNY KNOXVILLE, Ari did Hillary and out popped WEE MAN, who chased BUSHWICK BILL around the Stern sets of the late 1990s, who then ran into mean, little, distorted BEETLEJUICE, which is what former crackhead Barack Obama's head will look like, soon enough, or didn't SLEEPER catch up to you?

Van Dyke went color after JFK because the next fool drunk or addict to blow Bay of Pigs but start up a crisis or you refuse to notice Jews are from ETHIOPIA when you are from KENYA and a UK-Israeli-US-Saudi-Vatican Imperialist-Zionist, in violation of our royal favors exclusion clause, commerce clauses, with bills of attainder, for illegally established religious profiteers.

By the time we remember USCA 1, the WAR is about illegal establishment of religion, which Abrahamic riot may not issue, further, yet look at that Pope sleazeball and his RICO do whatever!

Since there were no names or photos if the alleged troublemakers, were they, perhaps, members of a protected minority? (ex: african-american, latino or "the religion of peace")
P.S. Bob, try to stay on topic and be a little more clear and consice in your ideas so that people are more likely to understand your comments.

Curious,

Your question is bizarre and, I believe, intended to incite racial offense where there was none. There is no "protected minority," at least not in the way you seem to mean. Any suspect, of any race or religion, who is over 18 and accused by police of a serious crime will be named in the Voice along with a photo, should that information be available. This has always been the case.

As far as I know it's the case at all media outlets. Have you not noticed that suspects named in crime stories are often minorities?

Your personal obsessions are your own and not relevant to this story. Please learn to distinguish between them and the issue at hand.

In response to Don Frances, I know that anybody (of any race or religion) can commit a crime. I have also noticed that in print media that only caucasians are named along with their photo printed. I would interpret this as media bias. while I am criticized for noticing bias, Bob, from Cuesta Park, gets a free pass for disrespecting Catholics and Jews. Are Catholics and Jews "non-protected" minorities? I do not disrespect anybody. I just would like print media to play on a level playing field. If an African-American commits a crime against a caucasian, it is just a crime, but if a caucasian commits a crime against an African-American, why it is automatically a "Hate Crime"? I am all for everybody getting along with everybody else. I have friends of all races and religions. We can all get along.

The funny thing about racism is that in most cases, the only one who winds up getting hurt by it is the person holding racist views. Racists are always busy watching The Others while the folks they consider My People are stealing the silverware and the TV set.

"I have also noticed that in print media that only caucasians are named along with their photo printed. I would interpret this as media bias."

Again, this assertion is just bizarre to me. Probably the great majority of crime stories in all papers feature suspects who are minorities in the typical sense of the word. In fact, usually we catch criticism for the exact opposite: they say newspapers perpetrate negative stereotypes by reporting on all the minority-related crime. (We are only reporting the truth as we know it, but that's not good enough for readers with an agenda.)

Meanwhile, minority-related stories can elicit actual racist responses from some readers, especially the ones obsessed with illegal immigration. But this is the first time I've been accused of bias for *not* naming suspects in minority-related crimes.

Anyway, a Google search for "murder" on our Web site produces multiple examples of minority suspects accused of crimes. Here's a few:

Web Link
Web Link
Web Link

Curious of the Waverly Park neighborhood: What you're not figuring here is that our stories on the Shoreline stabbings don't have names and pictures of the suspects because there are no such names and pictures. No suspects have been identified at this time.