gun

A warrant has been issued for the arrest of former NFL superstar Antonio Brown stemming from an altercation outside a celebrity kickboxing event last month in Miami.

Brown is charged with the first-degree felony of attempted second-degree murder with a firearm. A judge from the 11th Judicial Circuit in Miami-Dade County signed the warrant Wednesday.

The warrant, which has been viewed by The Times, states that once Brown is arrested, he will be held on a $10,000 bond before being released and under house arrest before a trial.

Just before midnight on May 16, the warrant states, Miami police were dispatched to a location on NE 67th St. in the Little Haiti neighborhood in response to a report of gunshots being fired in the area.

Brown had already been detained by off-duty Florida Highway Patrol officers serving as security for the amateur boxing event held in the area. One of those officers stated that “several patrons from the event identified Mr. Brown as the shooter and informed him that Mr. Brown was armed,” the warrant states.

After being patted down and deemed to be unarmed at that point, Brown was released “due to the absence of identified victims at the time.”

A Miami police review of surveillance camera footage revealed that an altercation between Brown and another man took place before the shooting. The footage showed Brown striking the man with a closed fist, and a fight that involved additional individuals ensued, the warrant states.

Security broke up the fight, according to the warrant, but Brown “appears to retrieve a black firearm from the right hip area” of one of the security staff members and ran with the gun out of the parking area in the direction that the man he was fighting with had gone.

The warrant states that “cell phone video obtained from social media” shows Brown advancing toward the other man with the gun in hand and captures “two shots which occur as Mr. Brown is within several feet” of the other man, who can be seen “ducking after the first shot is heard.”

In a May 21 interview with a police detective, the alleged victim identified Brown in the surveillance video and said they had known each other since 2022, the warrant states. He also indicated he possibly had been grazed in the neck by one of the bullets, was in fear for his life during the incident and went to a hospital afterward to treat his injuries.

Brown appeared to address the alleged incident in a May 17 post on X.

“I was jumped by multiple individuals who tried to steal my jewelry and cause physical harm to me,” Brown wrote. “Contrary to some video circulating, Police temporarily detained me until they received my side of the story and then released me. I WENT HOME THAT NIGHT AND WAS NOT ARRESTED. I will be talking to my legal council and attorneys on pressing charges on the individuals that jumped me.”

Brown posted on X several times on Friday, with none of those posts mentioning the arrest warrant. One seemed to indicate he’s not in the U.S. at the moment — it features a video of a grinning Brown riding a bike with the hashtag #lovefromthemiddleeast.

A seven-time Pro Bowl receiver, Brown played nine of his 12 NFL seasons with the Pittsburgh Steelers and won a Super Bowl with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers following the 2020 season. He made a bizarre, shirtless exit from the field during a regular-season game Jan. 2, 2022, and has not played since.

He has a history of legal troubles. In 2019, Brown was sued by a former trainer who said he sexually assaulted her multiple times. Brown denied the allegations. The lawsuit was settled out of court in 2021.

In 2020, Brown pleaded no contest to burglary and battery charges connected to an altercation with a moving company. He was ordered to serve two years of probation and 100 hours of community service, attend an anger management program and undergo psychological and psychiatric evaluation.

Brown was suspended for eight games in 2020 for multiple violations of the NFL’s personal conduct policy.

Also, in October 2023, the former star wide receiver was arrested for failing to pay child support.

Colombia on edge as attacks come just days after assassination attempt on conservative presidential hopeful.

Southwest Colombia has been rocked by a series of explosions and gun attacks near police stations that have left at least four people dead, according to police, an apparent coordinated attack that authorities have blamed on rebel groups.

The attacks hit Cali – the country’s third-largest city – and the nearby towns of Corinto, El Bordo, and Jamundi, targeting police stations and other municipal buildings with car and motorcycle bombs, rifle fire and a suspected drone, the head of police Carlos Fernando Triana told local radio station La FM on Tuesday.

The bombings came just days after the attempted assassination of presidential hopeful Senator Miguel Uribe Turbay at a campaign rally in the capital Bogota, allegedly by a 15-year-old hitman, an attack that rattled a nation with a dark past of assassinations.

In Corinto, an AFP journalist witnessed the tangled wreckage of a car that had exploded next to a scorched and badly damaged municipal building.

“There are two police officers dead, and a number of members of the public are also dead,” said Triana.

Police later said at least two civilians were among those killed, and 12 others were injured.

It was not immediately clear who was behind the attacks, but military and police spokespeople blamed the strikes on the FARC-EMC, which is known to operate in the area. The group is led by former members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) who broke away from the group after it signed a peace deal with the government in 2016.

Colombia on edge

Triana suggested the attacks may be linked to the third anniversary of the killing of FARC dissident leader Leider Johani Noscue, better known as “Mayimbu”.

The bombings just three days after Uribe’s attempted assassination have set Colombia further on edge.

Uribe, a member of the opposition conservative Democratic Centre party, underwent successful initial surgery on Sunday. The hospital treating him said on Tuesday that he remained stable but in critical condition.

“We continue to take the necessary actions to mitigate the impact of the injuries,” the Santa Fe Foundation hospital added in a statement.

Thousands have taken to the streets in major cities to light candles, pray and voice their anger at the assassination attempt. Authorities say they are investigating who was behind the attack on Uribe. Leftist President Gustavo Petro, who has vowed to bring peace to the country, said on Sunday that he had ordered additional security for opposition leaders in response to more threats.

Many Colombians are fearful of a return to the bloody violence of the 1980s and 1990s, when cartel attacks and political assassinations were frequent, sowing terror across the nation.

Colombia’s government has struggled to contain violence in urban and rural areas as several rebel groups try to take over territory abandoned by the FARC after its peace deal with the government.

Peace talks between the FARC-EMC faction and the government broke down last year after a series of attacks on Indigenous communities.

The California Department of Justice will investigate a fatal shooting by Los Angeles Police Department officers under a law that empowers the state attorney general to probe police shootings of unarmed people — despite the LAPD saying the man killed Tuesday was holding a gun.

At 10 p.m. Tuesday, officers responded to a reported shooting in an apartment building in the 1000 block of Ardmore Avenue in Koreatown, LAPD officials said in an unsigned statement.

As they entered the building, Ronald Gainer Jr. exited an apartment holding a handgun, officials said. The officers fired at Gainer, who retreated into the apartment.

The officers entered the unit and took Gainer into custody, according to the LAPD. Gainer, 35, died at a hospital, according to the L.A. County Medical Examiner’s office.

Officers found a handgun and discharged cartridge casings “at scene,” the LAPD said, along with a second gun and ammunition inside the apartment.

According to the police statement, Gainer was involved earlier that evening in a “domestic violence incident” with his girlfriend. After she fled, Gainer allegedly fired a gun into the air and toward a building, prompting the response by the officers who shot him, the LAPD said.

The LAPD’s Force Investigation Division was already probing the shooting — standard protocol for all uses of force by officers — when on Wednesday
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta announced his office was investigating as well.

In a press release, Bonta cited Assembly Bill 1506, which requires the state’s Department of Justice to investigate police shootings of unarmed people.

Alexandra Duquet, a spokeswoman for Bonta, said state prosecutors will investigate cases when it isn’t immediately clear whether the person killed had control of a weapon.

Assembly Bill 1506 defines “possession” of a weapon as being “under the civilian’s dominion and control at the time of the shooting.”

Agents from the Department of Justice’s Division of Law Enforcement will conduct an investigation separate from the LAPD’s and present their findings to prosecutors in Bonta’s office, who will make a decision to bring criminal charges.

If no case is filed, state prosecutors must release a report detailing the evidence and the legal reasoning for why charges were not warranted.

Various semiautomatic handguns are displayed in a case at a gun store in Dundee, Ill. (2010). On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled against a lawsuit filed by Mexico that accuses seven American gun manufacturers and one wholesaler of unlawful sale practices, and arming drug dealers. File Photo by Brian Kersey/UPI | License Photo

June 5 (UPI) — The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday against a lawsuit filed by Mexico that accuses seven American gun manufacturers and one wholesaler of unlawful sale practices, and arming drug dealers.

“The question presented is whether Mexico’s complaint plausibly pleads that conduct. We conclude it does not,” wrote Justice Elena Kagan in the opinion of the court.

Mexico filed suit in March against a group of companies that includes Smith & Wesson, Beretta, Colt and Glock, alleging that the defendants violated the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, or PLCAA, which can allow for some lawsuits against the makers and sellers of firearms.

As stated in the case document, Mexico purports the accused companies “aided and abetted unlawful gun sales that routed firearms to Mexican drug cartels,” and failed to exercise “reasonable care” to keep their guns from being trafficked into Mexico.

Kagan explained that it falls on the plaintiff in this case to properly show that the defendant companies directly committed violations of PLCAA, or otherwise “the predicate violation opens a path to making a gun manufacturer civilly liable for the way a third party has used the weapon it made.”

Kagan did include that “Mexico has a severe gun violence problem, which its government views as coming from north of the border.” She added that the country has only a single gun store, which is slightly inaccurate as Mexico currently has two, but in regard of the one store she mentioned, Kagan claimed that it “issues fewer than 50 gun permits each year.”

She also purported gun traffickers can purchase weaponry in the United States, often illegally, and then take those guns to drug cartels in Mexico. Kagan further noted that as per the Mexican government, “as many as 90% of the guns recovered at crime scenes in Mexico originated in the United States.”

Nonetheless, the court ruled “that Mexico has not plausibly alleged aiding and abetting on the manufacturers’ part.” This is why, Kagan explained, that the defendant companies are immune under the PLCAA.

In a concurring statement, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the court’s opinion hasn’t resolved what exactly a future plaintiff will have to show to prove a defendant has committed a PLCAA violation, and that Mexico hadn’t “adequately pleaded its theory of the case.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also included a concurring statement that Congress passed PLCAA in order to decide “which duties to impose on the firearms industry,” and that ignoring PLCAA’s set reasons that do “authorize lawsuits like the one Mexico filed here” would twist PLCAA’s main purpose.

WASHINGTON — Mexico has a severe problem with gun violence, which originates north of the border, the Supreme Court acknowledged Thursday.

“The country has only a single gun store, and issues fewer than 50 gun permits each year. But gun traffickers can purchase firearms in the United States—often in illegal transactions—and deliver them to drug cartels in Mexico,” the court said. These weapons are used to “commit serious crimes — drug dealing, kidnapping, murder, and others.”

Nonetheless, the justices in an unanimous decision threw out Mexico’s lawsuit against the U.S. gun industry, ruling that federal law shields gun makers from nearly all liability.

Justice Elena Kagan said Congress enacted the law in 2005 to prevent gun companies from being held sued for harms “caused by the misuse of firearms by third parties, including criminals,” she said.

The law has one narrow exception, she said, that would allow suits if the gun companies had knowingly and deliberately helped criminals buy guns to be sent into Mexico.

But she said the Mexico’s lawsuit did not cite evidence for claim.

“Mexico’s complaint does not plausibly allege that the defendant manufacturers aided and abetted gun dealers’ unlawful sales of firearms to Mexican traffickers,” she wrote. “We have little doubt that, as the complaint asserts, some such sales take place.— and that the manufacturers know they do. But still, Mexico has not adequately pleaded what it needs to: that the manufacturers ‘participate in’ those sales “as in something that [they] wish[] to bring about.”

On May 21, as they left the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim were fatally shot, and because they were employees of the Israeli Embassy and the suspect was associated with pro-Palestinian politics, the story was reported in the familiar mode of Middle East politics.

The questions that reporters and pundits have been asking are: “Was this antisemitic?” “Was this killing a direct result of Israel’s starving of Palestinians in Gaza?” “Was this another act of pro-Palestinian terrorism?” “Is this the direct result of ‘globalizing the intifada’?” While these are valid questions, they miss a central part of the story.

Only in the eighth paragraph of the New York Times report are we told that the night before the shooting, according to officials, the suspect “had checked a gun with his baggage when he flew from Chicago to the Washington area for a work conference” and, further, that officials said “The gun used in the killings had been purchased legally in Illinois.” (The Los Angeles Times article does not mention these facts.) This tragic shooting, however, is not unique.

In November 2023, a Burlington, Vt., man was arrested and charged with shooting three Palestinian college students without saying a word to them. (He has pleaded not guilty.)

In October 2018, a gunman entered the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh and shot and killed 11 Jews at prayer.

In 2015, three Muslim students were shot and killed by their neighbor in Chapel Hill, N.C.

This brief and very incomplete list of the literally hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed by guns in the U.S. in the last decade does not include the racist mass shootings in Buffalo, N.Y., and at Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, S.C.; the mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Fla.; or the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, at a music festival in Las Vegas in 2017. This macabre list also leaves out the thousands of people who have been shot and killed by law enforcement.

The elephant in the room — so fundamentally accepted that it largely goes unmentioned — is the deeply ingrained culture of violence in the United States. Gun ownership, police violence and abuse, and mass shootings are symptoms of that culture. However, the militaristic approach to international conflict (from Vietnam to Ukraine) and the disdain for nonviolent solutions are also grounded in this culture, as are the manosphere and the cruelty of predatory capitalism. Now we have a presidential administration that embodies this culture.

Kristi Noem, the secretary of Homeland Security, personifies this ethos of cruelty and violence when she is photographed in front of a cage full of humans in a Salvadoran jail known for torturous treatment of inmates or writing casually about killing her dog. Noem is a key player in the theater of cruelty, but she is not the only one, and the unparalleled star is of course President Trump.

Trump’s policy agenda is based on vengeance. He revels in the theatricality of violence of the world of mixed martial arts, and he signs executive orders that aim to destroy individuals, law firms and universities that have not bent the knee, and the economics of his “Big Beautiful” budget moves money from those in need to those who need for naught.

Now, the president wants a military parade on his birthday that will include tanks, helicopters and soldiers. Although Trump himself evaded the draft, and he reportedly called American soldiers who were killed in war suckers and losers, he likes the strongman aesthetic of an army that is at his beck and call. He exulted in the fact that “we train our boys to be killing machines.”

Although some want to draw a dubious line from pro-Palestinian campus demonstrations to the killings of Lischinsky and Milgrim, the direct line that should be drawn is the one that everyone seems to have agreed to ignore: a culture of violence coupled with the widespread availability and ownership of guns inevitably leads to more death.

The only way we get out of this cycle of violence is by addressing the elephant in the room.

Aryeh Cohen is a rabbi and a professor at American Jewish University in Los Angeles. @irmiklat.bsky.social

Insights

L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.

Four months after the San Bernardino mass shooting, state lawmakers on Tuesday gave initial approval to five gun control bills, including measures that would outlaw assault rifles with detachable magazines, ban possession of clips holding more than 10 rounds and require homemade guns to be registered with the state.

The bills approved by the state Senate Public Safety Committee were introduced in response to the December shooting in San Bernardino that left 14 people dead and 22 others wounded at the hands of two terrorists.

One of the measures the panel sent toward the Senate floor would outlaw assault rifles with easily detachable bullet magazines like one of the weapons used in the mass shooting in San Bernardino.

The bill prohibits the sale of semiautomatic, centerfire rifles with a “bullet button,” a recessed button that, when pressed, allows removal of the magazine. Those who already own them must register them with the state as assault rifles.

Democratic state Sens. Isadore Hall of Compton and Steve Glazer of Orinda introduced the measure, SB 880, in response to the discovery of a gun with a bullet button that was in the possession of the San Bernardino terrorists.

“These weapons of war don’t belong in our communities,” Glazer told the Senate panel before it approved the measure he coauthored with Hall.

Hall said there is an urgent need to close a loophole in the law that bans assault weapons.

“For years, gun owners have been able to circumvent California’s assault weapons law by using a small tool to quickly eject and reload an ammunition magazine,” Hall said.

The measure is opposed by gun owner rights groups including the National Rifle Assn., according to its lobbyist, Ed Worley.

“We continue to oppose banning guns for citizens who have no criminal background,” Worley told the panel. “People should be able to own any kind of gun they want to own in the United States of America.”

The Senate panel also approved a bill by Sen. Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley) that would ban the possession of ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds, closing a loophole in a law that already prohibits their manufacture and sale in California.

Hancock noted that four large-capacity magazines were found among the weapons of the two shooters in San Bernardino. Since 1980, 435 people have been killed in 50 mass shootings involving large-capacity magazines, some of which can hold 100 rounds of ammunition, she said.

The magazines have already been banned in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

“By banning these weapons statewide we would be taking a step to preventing future mass shootings and creating safer communities in California,” Hancock told the Senate panel.

Republican Sen. Jeff Stone voted against the bill.

“Today we want to make criminals out of law-abiding citizens who have been collecting guns,” Stone said.

————

FOR THE RECORD

April 20, 11:35 a.m.: An earlier version of this story mistakenly attributed a quote to Sen. John Moorlach. The statement was from Sen. Jeff Stone.

————

The measure was also opposed by others including Worley and Sam Paredes, the executive director of Gun Owners of California, who said millions of large-capacity clips are already in the hands of Californians.

“Here we are trying to confiscate people’s property,” Worley told the panel.

Paredes said many law enforcement officers are given large-capacity magazines.

“That is what they may need to protect themselves,” Paredes said. “Why should it be any different for a law-abiding citizen?”

The Senate committee also approved a bill that would allow the state to collect information on those who buy ammunition for firearms. An earlier law that would have required bullet purchasers to provide identification and a thumbprint was struck down by a court in 2010 on the grounds that its definition of handgun ammunition was vague.

That case is on appeal to the state Supreme Court.

The new bill by Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De León (D-Los Angeles), SB 1235, would clarify that the previous law applies to all ammunition, including bullets for long guns and handguns as well as shotgun shells, which he hopes will address the lower court’s concerns.

The panel also approved a bill requiring those who build guns at home to register them with the state, get a serial number and undergo a criminal background check.

“These firearms are called ‘ghost guns’ because they are built at home … with no serial numbers or background checks involved,” De León told the panel before it approved the bill on a 5-3 party-line vote. “These are weapons that have the ability to kill or maim a human being.”

Hundreds of ghost guns have been seized in California, and they have been used in major crimes, including a mass shooting in 2013. The measure is backed by the California Police Chiefs Assn.

See more of our top stories on Facebook >>

“Gun-smithing has become easier than putting together Ikea furniture because of the 3-D printer,” said Chief Jennifer G. Tejada of the Emeryville Police Department. “This bill will decrease the number of untraceable firearms in California.”

The measure is opposed by groups including the NRA and Gun Owners of California.

“We’re going to take hobbyists who enjoy making guns and we’re going to make them criminals,” Worley said.

The panel also approved measures that would require firearms owners to report lost or stolen guns to authorities within five days and another to create a gun violence prevention research center at a University of California system campus.

Meanwhile, a bill that would have required all gun sales to be videotaped failed to pass an Assembly committee on Tuesday.

[email protected]

Follow @mcgreevy99 on Twitter

ALSO

Are you an independent voter? You aren’t if you checked this box

Los Angeles Times wins Pulitzer for San Bernardino terrorist attack coverage

Updates from Sacramento

Los Angeles County prosecutors filed criminal charges Tuesday against Jillian Lauren Shriner, a bestselling author who is married to Weezer bassist Scott Shriner, following an incident last month where she was wounded by police after allegedly shooting at them from her backyard.

The author, who publishes under the last name Lauren, appeared in a downtown Los Angeles courthouse, pleading not guilty to felony charges for willful discharge of a firearm in a gross negligent manner and assault of a person with a semiautomatic firearm. Prosecutors are also seeking a firearms sentencing enhancement. She faces up to 19 years in state prison if convicted on counts.

Lauren, 51, sported an all-white suit as she stood before the judge to enter her plea. She and her lawyers, Hilary Potashner and Kim Wilkinson, declined to comment after the hearing.

Lauren was initially booked April 9 on suspicion of attempted murder after a bewildering encounter with the LAPD. That afternoon, officers were searching for three hit-and-run suspects following a crash on the 134 Freeway. According to 911 calls from the area, the suspects were attempting to hide in neighborhood backyards around Eagle Rock.

The pursuit led officers to Lauren’s property, where a confrontation ensued as she stood in her backyard armed with a handgun.

Police body cameras and home surveillance videos appeared to show Lauren raising her gun and pointing it at a fence where officers had taken cover. Police said she refused their commands to drop the weapon and fired at them. The police said they shot back, hitting Lauren in the arm.

She fled back into her home, where she remained for about an hour before she was hospitalized and later taken into custody by the Highway Patrol.

There are some indications Lauren may have been unable to hear the officers due to a police helicopter hovering above the scene, possibly mistaking them for the hit-and-run suspects. In a video released by the LAPD, a neighbor could be heard telling a 911 dispatcher Lauren was confused about what happened: “There were three men, and one of them shot her, and the cops are looking for him right now … They have their guns out.”

The New Jersey native has been named a New York Times Bestselling Author for her books, “Everything You Ever Wanted” and “Some Girls: My Life in a Harem” where she recounts her encounters with Prince Jefri Bolkiah of Brunei. Most recently, she published “Behold the Monster: Facing America’s Most Prolific Serial Killer,” a look inside the mind of serial killer Samuel Little. She and Shriner have been married since 2005 and they have two sons together.

Lauren’s preliminary hearing to determine whether the cases against her will move forward is scheduled for June 18.