The Nation on Despite His Generally Sympathetic Rhetoric, It Turns Out That Since 2015 Mike Bonin Has Moved Or Seconded Almost 60% Of Anti-Homeless Oversize Vehicle Bans, Helping To Make Revised Ban On Car Sleeping Even More Draconian Than Anticipated An LA Councilman Tried To Help The Homeless.Alex Fridman Jr on I Have Been Forced Yet Again To File A Petition Against The City Of Los Angeles To Enforce The California Public Records Act - The Bureau Of Street Services Refuses To Release Emails About Those Illegal Anti-Homeless Planters - Which I Have Been Waiting On For Well Over A Year.Zachary Bennet on The School on 103 rd Street.JP on MichaelKohlhaas.Org - The Last Post.If you're interested in collaborating on it, you can drop me a line. Sadly this project is on hold due to time constraints. The Los Angeles BID Wiki will eventually collect and organize all of our information and understanding of BIDs in Los Angeles.
How to Destroy a Business Improvement District in California: A Theory
How is this Even Legal? BID Patrol Attacks a Sitting Man, Forcibly Handcuffs Him, and Then, With Full Cooperation of LAPD, Arrests Him for Kicking one of Them During Putative “Arrest”
Some of the information we were missing then we’ve obtained now. Of course, what the city and the local BIDs really don’t like is the naked ladies.
Since last we examined this issue, the NYPD has gone nuclear by asking Disney and Marvel to sue the street characters, something which those companies seem to have proved unwilling to do. It just hasn’t been rigorously tested here….yet!
That’s not the kind of law that’s going to withstand any pressure, though. You can’t trademark breasts, so what are they going to do about topless street characters when they get to L.A.? One might argue that women can bare their breasts legally in New York but not in California.
At least not this time…We recently had occasion to write about the HPOA’s continent-spanning conspiracy with a bunch of their creepy counterparts in Manhattan to abuse intellectual property law, to violate California Penal Code §158, to constructively violate the first amendment, and both stridently and characteristically to act the fool with respect to the burning issue of street characters. What rights are being violated here? What torts being committed? Is the photographer violating trademarks? Performance rights? Rights of publicity? False light?!? Are we violating any of these rights by republishing this photo? I guess we’re gonna find out! At least the BID Patrol can’t pop old Elmo for violating LAMC 41.47.2.