Front Page  »  

Father fights off gang members in Grover Beach

January 9, 2011

Two gang members required medical treatment after a father fought to protect his family during an alleged random assault by three members of a Santa Maria gang at Grover Beach Elementary School on Saturday.

“It is not unusual to see someone who is not associated with a gang assaulted by gang members,” said Grover Beach Police Sgt. Chris Sweeton. “A lot of time gangs don’t discriminate, they pick fights if they see someone in their area.”

At about 5:20 p.m., five members of a Grover Beach family, two adult males and three children ages 3, 9 and 15, were walking through the school grounds when a 14-year-old gang member challenged the 15-year-old to a fight. After the two adult family members attempted to stop the fight, Anthony Mayo, 19, of Grover Beach allegedly attacked them.

During the assault, the three assailants identified themselves as members of a Santa Maria gang.

Anthony Mayo

The father injured Mayo and the Santa Maria teen as he fought to protect his children. The three suspects fled after being told that police were on their way.

Police arrested Mayo and the Santa Maria teen at Arroyo Grande Community Hospital where they were being treated for injuries suffered during the fight. Police are not identifying the teen because he is a juvenile.

One family member was punched and suffered minor injuries.

Police booked Mayo, who was armed with a knife during the assault, into San Luis Obispo County Jail on suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon, child endangerment, participating in a criminal street gang, conspiracy and violating terms of his parole. He is being held without bail because he is a parolee.

The teen was booked into the San Luis Obispo County Juvenile Services on suspicion of battery, child endangerment, participating in a criminal street gang, conspiracy and violating probation.

Police are searching for the unidentified third assailant.


Loading...
Subjects:         
Related:


28 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Sadly, this is the future. Look at gang activity in Salinas and Santa Maria, located on both ends of us. It’s going to get a lot worse before it gets any better, if it ever does in our lives. There are negative cultural and socioeconomic issues that have infiltrated inner cites that continues to spread out into uncharted territory.


1

Gun Control = A good two handed grip, Correct sight picture, Gentle but firm trigger squeeze….No more gang banging dirt bag.


1

Nonsense Curly….


…you should always ‘press’ the trigger in a smooth, increasing pressure until the sear breaks…


.


0

Perhaps we could get the local chapter of the NRA to give us a demonstration of gun control once Mr Mayo and friends are out of jail. Before he sues the state and the family for injuries received. Hmm wonder if this guy is documented…..or if he is just good old american trash


1

Sick


0

Good going dad, you are our hero for the day. Let’s hope the courts put these thugs behind bars until they are old enough to collect social security!


1

Put a contract out on him? WTF dude you watch too much TV. Yes we should sanction random killings, what were we thinking with that whole silly justice system. Perhaps we could just hire a defense contractor to fly drones over bad neighborhoods and randomly fire upon any group of three or more mexicans begining to gather, you know nip it in the bud.


I dont think this dad is a hero, he is a dad who did what he had to do and I dont begrudge him for it at all. In fact I kind of take a certain pleasure in the natural justice that randomly occured.


0

Maybe they can call Batman and Robin, the dynamic dual will save them.


0

Bravo! What a hero this father is!


1

Look at the picture of that little worthless douche-nozzle. It’s a dog-gone shame that the adult victims weren’t able to produce a legally possessed firearm and send that lowlife scum to a permanent dirt-nap.


It’s time this state recognized the responsible citizen’s right to carry a concealed firearm. Let’s make it so the criminals have to wonder whether THEY’RE going to survive their next attempt at crime.


1

Bravo on your analysis Bob. What would have happened to this family if the father had been physically unable to step in? What would have happened to this family if the father had been knifed?


We are created with God given rights. The Bill of Rights is there to tell government to stay away from those rights. The state of California has seen fit to separate its citizens from their God given right to Bear Arms for the purpose of self defense.


Both of those parents should have been carrying a weapon that they are proficient with to stop a threat. When are people going to start taking responsibility for their own safety? In Warren v. District of Columbia the court held that it is a “…fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen…” Wake up people, we have to demand that the state allow us to Bear Arms for the purpose of self defense.


How much gang activity would there be if every time they challenged a citizen they got shot? Society really only has 3 classes: wolves, sheep, and sheep dogs. The father in this story is a sheep dog. What would have the outcome been if he was just another sheep?


1

“Society really only has 3 classes: wolves, sheep, and sheep dogs.” NO. We are humans; any attempt to define “society” in anything other that human terms is lazy and dangerous. Those that staged this attack are not “wolves”, they are young men that thought they had the ability to impose their will upon anyone they encountered, and they found out how wrong they were. The father is not a “sheep dog” protecting his flock, he is a man who stepped up and defended his family in a manner that anyone would try if their family was attacked, and he had the good fortune to not only repel the attack but he also inflicted damage upon those who attacking. He may have had some training, be it military, law enforcement, or self defense training; it really doesn’t matter how he did it, the best part of course is that he was able to defend his family. As for the rest of society being “sheep”; real sheep will always be just that , sheep unable to do anything other than graze and bleat and if attacked, they usually perish. People on the other hand have the ability to take training to learn how to defend themselves, whether it is women who take the very effective “Model Mugging” courses where they practice full contact with a person dressed in protective gear and actually kick, punch, jab and scream at full force, or any other number of martial arts including Judo, jujitsu, Aikido, so on and so on. NO, it is not “wolves, sheep and sheep dogs”; it is people, people who have varying degrees of being able to defend themselves or least be aware enough of their surroundings to avoid letting themselves get into a situation where they could be attacked.


0

Guess the elderly and those who are in someway unable to defend themselves should stay in their homes. Woman should all be tough enough to beat up a man and we should all be prepared to take on more than one. That is the world according to bobfromsanluis.


In the mean time, watch where you walk, the school grounds in your neighborhood may not be safe as gangs have claimed them. Stay home or learn to beat them up but God forbid that you carry a gun. Gun’s are for criminals and fists are for men and woman. God Bless you bobfromsanluis.


0

Cindy: Wow. What a twisted interpretation of what I wrote; the elderly and those unable to defend themselves don’t necessarily need to “stay in their homes”, they need to be smart about how they go about their days. If you need to go shopping or run errands, do be aware of the areas you are traveling in; if you see a situation that seems odd, avoid being there alone. Have a friend or relative accompany you if you are unsure of where you are going. It is called “common sense”; I would assume that you have some, that you do not put yourself at risk by being aware of where you travel.

“Women should all be tough enough to beat up a man …. ” Again, an idiotic interpretation of the intent of my words. By training to defend yourself, you do not become invincible and are able to “take on” anyone; what you gain is the confidence to pay attention to what is going on around you and you learn how to be aware of your surroundings. Stopping an attack can sometimes be as simple as creating a lot of noise and drawing lots of attention to what is going on around you. Being aware means being ready to scream or run, not just to kick some guy in the nads. There are quite a few seniors that regularly enjoy Tai Chi as an exercise only, but the movements have their roots in martial arts, and if they are unfortunate enough to be attacked, they COULD defend themselves to the point of being able to get away from the attack. In your view then, is it better that no one learns how to defend themselves, but instead everyone carries a handgun? Your mocking my comments seem to be based in either ignorance or you have an agenda to push the ability for anyone to be “locked and loaded”.


0

…anything but taking personal responsibility for one’s security. Heaven forbid the weaker citizens of our society gain a skill at arms that would allow them to intelligently and effectively defend themselves with a firearm.


The 2nd Amendment has been ruled to be a fundamental individual right that allows citizens to KEEP and BEAR arms. This is a CIVIL RIGHT.


Personally, I support civil rights. ALL of them. ALL of them equally. You can’t cherry pick civil rights. Please don’t oppress me and my civil rights!


0

Curious, I don’t remember saying that firearms (handguns) should be outlawed, or illegal; I asked Cindy if she would prefer that no one try to learn to protect themselves by learning self defense but instead everyone just armed themselves. I for one have no desire own or use a firearm, ever, but that is just me. There is also the law to consider; it is against the law to carry a loaded handgun on your person unless you have a permit to do so. That does not stop some people, I realize, just as the law itself does not stop criminals from carrying weapons. It is just my opinion that someone who is so afraid of their surroundings and fearful for their safety that the only thing that makes them less afraid is to carry a loaded handgun on their person is either too ignorant or lazy to look into learning some sort of self defense. Learning and knowing self defensive does not make you safer; it helps you learn to be more confident and how to be more aware of your surroundings so that you can avoid being a victim, period; it doesn’t mean that you cannot or will not be attacked or hurt, but your chances of avoiding or surviving are greatly enhanced. Keep your handgun, please, just keep it to yourself.


0

“Learning and knowing self defensive does not make you safer; it helps you learn to be more confident and how to be more aware of your surroundings so that you can avoid being a victim, period; it doesn’t mean that you cannot or will not be attacked or hurt, but your chances of avoiding or surviving are greatly enhanced.” …and my choice of self defense would be a firearm. The ONLY purpose of self defense is to STOP the threat. When you recognize that you have no choice but to fight or die, you are absolutely going to want the best tool for the job.


Also, you need to more closely examine PC 12025 exceptions:

12025.5 (a) A violation of Section 12025 is justifiable when a person who possesses a firearm reasonably believes that he or she is in grave danger because of circumstances forming the basis of a current restraining order…


12031 (i) Nothing in this section shall prevent any person from carrying a loaded firearm in an area within an incorporated city while engaged in hunting, provided that the hunting at that place and time is not prohibited by the city council.

(j) (1) Nothing in this section is intended to preclude the carrying of any loaded firearm, under circumstances where it would otherwise be lawful, by a person who reasonably believes that the person or property of himself or herself or of another is in immediate, grave danger and that the carrying of the weapon is necessary for the preservation of that person or property. As used in this subdivision, “immediate” means the brief interval before and after the local law enforcement agency, when reasonably possible, has been notified of the danger and before the arrival of its assistance.


This doesn’t even begin to explore the instances when a law abiding citizen can Unloaded Open Carry (UOC).


Stop spreading FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Deception).


0

Jeepers; I do not believe that I am attempting to spread fear, uncertainty or to deceive- I stated my opinion. I have no need to own, carry or use a firearm, ever. I have not advocated that you or anyone else should not be able to; I have not called for anyone to be arrested or detained due to their feelings about firearms. You have your reasons for owning a weapon, that is your business and I have no “need” to interfere with your right to do so. I do take it that not too many here feel the same way I do about firearms and that is okay with me; I do find it somewhat fascinating that the moment someone questions why someone feels a need to arm themselves, there is a barrage of negative thumbs, and the accusation that the person doing the questioning wants to “take away your rights”. Your obsession with a machine designed to kill humans is your right, enjoy.


0

bob, Of course it is important for people to be aware of their circumstances and to use caution. I use it everyday and every night which brings me to my point. There are things that I would like to do that I don’t because I don’t feel safe and I should not have to feel that way when I want to take a long quiet walk late at night on star lit deserted streets. I would like to go camping all alone in the forest where nobody else is around for 2 or 3 days or even just for one night but I can’t do that because it isn’t safe and I wouldn’t be able to enjoy the solitude. Last month while driving long distance during an evening I needed to use a rest room but there were no business locations around and I knew there wouldn’t be any for the next 30 miles. I passed a rest stop but was afraid to pull into the place and use the bathroom because I only saw one truck and one car pulled in there. These are examples of the times that I would like to be able to legally carry a firearm. I don’t see why I shouldn’t be able to defend myself. So the answer is yes, I believe that upstanding citizens should be able to arm themselves. I believe there would be less violence, not more. I already know that the criminals have guns, I would feel better if I knew the good guys had them too.


0

Well stated Cindy.


Pro gun == Pro civil rights


Anti gun == Civil rights oppression


0

I agree. A person needs to respond to a threat within seconds and no LE will be there to help.


0

It is sad and unfortunate the parents may have to consider relocation in fear of gang retailation.

If this is the case, putting a contract out on the leaders would not be out of the question nor insane.


0

For theses thugs, the more seriously injured the better.

I am glad the parents had the savy to do what they did.


0

Gangs. I loath all them.


0
1 2