.

Deputies Seek Attempted Rape Suspect

Sheriff's Department releases composite drawing of man for whom authorities are searching.

The Riverside County Sheriff's Department is looking for a man in connection with Thursday night's assault and attempted rape in an area just east of Temecula.

Lt. Doug McGrew said the victim was riding a bicycle on Willows Avenue and Sierra Madre in unincorporated Murrieta at about 11:20 p.m. when she heard someone running toward her.  The woman was tackled off her bike from behind and pinned to the ground by the suspect, who attempted to sexually assault her.

The victim struggled and was able to free herself; the suspect ran south on Willows Avenue, authorities said.

The suspect is described as a dark-skinned black man or Latino in his early 20s, heavy-set with a muscular build, short dark hair, clean-shaven, wearing a purple-colored T-shirt.

The suspect also may have an injury to the right side of his face. 

Anyone with information on the attack was asked to call the Riverside County sheriff's investigators, 951-696-3000. 

Adrian August 27, 2012 at 05:50 AM
Where do individual gun owners go to sign up for the well regulated militia? Do you all have your militia badge? That is the rub. You can't omit those three words! Unorganized, armed citizens do not a "well regulated militia" make. I keep having accusations of being a left-leaning, gun alarmist hurled at me. Really, I just think each and every word of the second must be recognized. I support the right to bear arms responsibly and in line with the whole of the second amendment. Lone citizens, reckoning that they are Wyatt Earp, just don't comprise a well regulated militia.
Adrian August 27, 2012 at 05:57 AM
I must add that I have no problem with gun ownership. I am concerned with gun carry and use.
Airborne Ranger August 27, 2012 at 06:04 AM
Text of Amendment reads: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. The origins of the amendment : Having been oppressed by a professional army, the founding fathers of the United States had no use for establishing one of their own. Instead, they decided that an armed citizenry makes the best army of all. General George Washington created regulation for the aforementioned "well-regulated militia," which would consist of every able-bodied man in the country. It wasn't until much later in our nations history that we actually stood up a professional full time army. You didn't have to sign up. It was expected that every man (and this was specific it did not include women back then) would become a member of the standing army of the United States of America when call upon. The Second Amendment holds the distinction of being the only amendment to the Bill of Rights that essentially goes unenforced. The U.S. Supreme Court has never struck down any piece of legislation on Second Amendment grounds, in part because justices have disagreed on whether the amendment is intended to protect the right to bear arms as an individual right, or as a component of the "well-regulated militia."
Airborne Ranger August 27, 2012 at 06:17 AM
Any sensible gun owner is concerned about gun carry and use. It's why we have laws on our books and legal ways to apply for and to carry legally. But let's be serious, it is not the legal gun owner who takes the time to properly get licensed and permitted to carry a gun legally that is causing the issues with gun crime in this country. One or two high profile shootings in this country are not going to change the daily drive by shootings occurring in East LA or Compton. Taking away lawfully owned weapons from law abiding citizens of this country is not going to stop it either. But since neither Rep or Dem has every been successful in reducing violent crime they focus on legally owned weapons and citizens that abide by the law instead with the perceived assumption that by taking away those weapons legally owned will somehow reduce crime. Both sides are naive in this. As long as there are people on this earth that believe it is easier to take what they want from someone else than to work for it themselves, violence will abound. This is human nature. Violence occurred since the beginning of the human race and taking away guns is not going to stop it. Violence is an act of aggression. When faced with aggression you have two choices; lay down or fight back. It is each individuals choice. I just don't want to be told that I have to lay down and surrender to aggression. Does it really make a difference if my gun holds one round or 10 if I obey the law?
Adrian August 27, 2012 at 07:10 AM
@Airborne, we are so close on this, my friend. Where the train leaves the track for me is my fear that too few gun owners are responsible gun owners. Even without criminal intent introduced, and even when viewing only legal gun owners, I just don't trust Joe Average Citizen to act in a prudent manner. A gun is a serious tool (which I am sure you know, as your sign-in name suggests a level of expertise). Humor me and allow me to compare a gun to a car, which is also a serious tool. In both cases, the tool is only as affective and safe as its operator. I don't think anyone would argue with the standards imposed on the public in order to promote the safe use of a car. Still, so many fail to uphold the standard and the car becomes, in essence, a weapon in light of this negligence. I fear that, despite standards imposed pursuant to gun ownership, there will be negligent use even amongst those in legal possession of a gun. Ideally, there would be a well regulated militia in place (not a very liberal idea, for all of the folks on here calling me a leftist). Going back to my original comment on this link, civilian law enforcement is presently our closest analogue. Without the regulation and organization, I fear what our prevailing, reactionary tendencies will contribute to a free gun culture. To recite the cliche, guns don't kill people, people kill people.
Adrian August 27, 2012 at 10:13 AM
Just an observation: all of this back and forth between everyone, myself included, defining and detailing every aspect of this issue might have distracted us from an article of grave importance. There is an alarming article on an increased rate of suicide within the rank and file of the Marine Corps. We might all want to give it at least a glance. I would say the issue deserves some portion of outlet attention.
Adrian August 27, 2012 at 10:14 AM
**our. I have no idea where my phone pulled out "outlet" from.
temeculan August 27, 2012 at 01:00 PM
Dear "Not a lefty", So...let me get this straight...I can own a gun but I can't carry it? And, I need to go find a militia? And, if I do carry a gun, it will force all the criminals to go get one too? Adrian, you're a peach.
Breech August 27, 2012 at 03:10 PM
Surely you jest.You cant throw a rock in this town without hitting leo.
Breech August 27, 2012 at 03:18 PM
Fear rules the lives of too many.The police cant save you,they just clean up the mess. Learn to take care of yourself,be aware of your surroundings.If it makes you feel better,carry a weapon,the criminals are.
Airborne Ranger August 27, 2012 at 05:58 PM
So the answer is to eliminate the guns so that the few that are irresponsible individuals the remainder of the society should be penalized. Hmmm. So given the same then we all should not have cars because of the few. Of course bus drivers are also out because there are a few that have been the cause of accidents. And of course when a bus crashes it is a mass casualty incident. Public transportation and pilots. We should not and can not regulate all of society because some either act illegally or irresponsibily. Increase the requirements for gun ownership. Completion of certified training courses, maybe. You can't stop stupid people from doing stupid things by punishing the mass. You won't stop violent crime by taking away legally owned guns. Your right guns don't kill people, neither do knives, cars, planes or baseball bats. Punish the people that do the crime. Enforce the laws, Punish the guilty and make it harsher. Quit coddeling the criminals that comit the crimes and make it hurt if the do commit a crime. You can't tell me you really believe that by only allowing the government to have guns, it will stop people from hurting people. Punish the guilty. Make the punishment fit the crime. Violent criminals don't reform in months or potentially even years. I'd rather fund the prision system then to allow to walk free. I don't believe in 3 strikes, 2 is more than plenty to protect society.
Adrian August 27, 2012 at 11:18 PM
@Airborne. You hit it the second time around. I am not suggesting an all out ban. I just push for the standards to be as high as is necessary to eliminate the largest number of unsafe gun owners/users. I agree with you in that stupid people will continue to do stupid things. We cannot avoid it! Also, please understand that my last comment in response to yours was not a call for action but, rather, a voicing of concerns. I don't have the answers, but that doesn't preclude me from sensing a problem.
Adrian August 27, 2012 at 11:23 PM
@Airborne. Also, if you read carefully, I don't advocate for gun possession being the sole domain of government. That is a frightening scenario. I just believe that, ideally, there should be some sort of organization within the ranks of private citizens wishing to USE their weapons for any purpose other than sport or immediate home defense. I fear a culture of Lone Rangers taking the law ino their own hands without a strategic plan.
watchingthings August 27, 2012 at 11:59 PM
Would WE file our strategic plan with the City, State or Federal Government? So I have someone breaking into my house, He has a knife and is going toward my child's room. Am I screwed because I haven't filed a form or do I tell him to wait and come back after 9am when I can file my 2nd Amendment forms for this dirt bag. Will this be a property thing? Do I need his SS number for my Strategic plan? Great Idea.. Where I am from its called being responsible...
Airborne Ranger August 28, 2012 at 12:32 AM
Please explain "I just believe that, ideally, there should be some sort of organization within the ranks of private citizens wishing to USE their weapons for any purpose other than sport or immediate home defense." Not sure I understand where you are going here. What other use is there than for sports or personal defense? What type of organization are you expounding to or suggesting is organized and for what purpose. We don't have militias today because we have elected to have a professional armed service for the defense of the nation (both federal and state). I don't get where you are going to. The point I was attempting to make is when you start to regulate a constitutional right of the citizen, where does it stop. Our government has taken the concept of the Constitution to place it should never had the right to go. But the people of this nation never stood up and said no.
Adrian August 28, 2012 at 01:00 AM
@Watching. Did you actually read my comment? You go into your scenario of the home break in but, did you notice my concession to immediate home defense? Let me say this again with some empashis: I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH GUN OWNERSHIP FOR IMMEDIATE HOME DEFENSE. I HAVE SAID IT OVER AND OVER. I would be shocked if you miss it this time! My concern is public carry, by individuals, where the temptation to take the law into one's own hands might come into play. I am saying that the organization must be in place before citizens start taking to the street with weapons and a "take back our town" mentality. That scenario seems to be advocated by a lot of conmentators on this thread. Let's have a well regulated militia. Would it be difficult to launch? Yes, incredibly. Do I know the best way to go about establishing such a structure? No. Once again, I am not setting out to define the solution. At this point I am merely stating my concerns and taking a few cracks at examining possibilities.
Adrian August 28, 2012 at 01:01 AM
@Airborne. Please note that I didn't say "personal defense". My words were: "immediate home defense". There is an important difference. To avoid further redundancy, please refer to my response to WathingThings. I worry about citizens walking about making rash threat assessments and having the fire power to back them up. There are structures in place, such as the myriad neighborhood watch programs, comprised of private citizens but supervised by local law enforcement. Like I said, I don't have the answers, but an augmented form of a neighborhood watch type program might fit the bill as a well regulated militia better than individual, armed citizens. I don't claim to know all, I just state my concerns.
Adrian August 28, 2012 at 01:12 AM
I am done. We will never get anywhere in this discussion if no one can see past the initial impression of me as some liberal gun alarmist. Either English language barriers exist (which they may, and there is no shame in that) or people are willfully ignoring my concessions to responsible gun ownership. Quit looking for some leftist scapegoat. If you truly need one, stop looking to me as one. Airborne, we were close to finding a middle ground. WatchingThings, et al, we were not. Go ahead, folks. Take to the streets bearing arms. Just don't come gunning for me or my family. Alas, at least you can count on the fact that I won't be armed!
watchingthings August 28, 2012 at 01:45 AM
Yes I did read your posts... Where would the laws stop is my point. I Have the right to bare arms If I want, And don't care for that to be infringed on.
Airborne Ranger August 28, 2012 at 07:43 AM
@Adrian, I've got to say I take some offense with your last statement. I'm not sure we were ever really close, but we both express our opinions in relative calm. But I am offended by your statement "Just don't come gunning for me or my family. " The 2nd Amendment and my right to bear arms (own a weapon) has nothing to do with marching in the streets with a weapon. Moreover, you statement make you look silly in that you believe that all armed citizens are out gunning for you and your family. You have a right not to be armed. Your decision. I have a right to be armed, my Constitutional right. It is a personal choice. It doesn't make me a criminal or a prospective murder. It doesn't mean I'm going march down the street and shoot everyone I see. Not sure I even understand your need to make such a statement as your closing point. It is ludicrous and really make you look silly when you have been expressing yourself well up to this point. Oh and I never necessarily viewed you and a liberal or a leftist, just anti gun ownership. I know many conservatives that are the same. But you should also know better to believe that by expressing your opinion here you are going to change other posters minds. No more so then we should expect to change your mind. But it was an interesting discussion. Oh and by the way gun ownership and carrying open or concealed are two very different matters. You might find that many of us are closer on the carry concept than you know.
TVOR August 28, 2012 at 03:33 PM
The real insight about the 2nd ammendment comes from the thousands of documents explaining our forefathers' intent in creating the 2nd ammendment. It is foolish to argue simply based on the words of the ammendment when the supporting documentation very clearly identifies the intent of the ammendment. Our forefathers wanted us to be able to defend ourselves, even from a tyrannical government. I truly hope that never becomes necessary but you can bet I will be prepared if the need ever arises.
GodGuy316 August 28, 2012 at 11:21 PM
Black or Mexican? That ain't no surprise. They shood be packed up and be sent back to friggin Mexico and wherever they came from with there dam Islam Obama. No white Christian would do this crime
Adrian August 28, 2012 at 11:35 PM
@Airborne. Sorry about the last comment. I do not apologize for the content, only for its broad reach. That should have been addressed to WatchingThings, et al, but I was so gobsmacked that I just typed away. I don't think you would ever come gunning for me. As I probably said before (and if not, then I am saying it now), you seem like a responsible gun owner and I wouldn't lose a second of sleep worrying about your use of your weapons. Certain others on here scare me, however!
Adrian August 28, 2012 at 11:37 PM
@God Guy....seriously? I can't even think of the words to respond. I am certain that sexual assault crosses all cultural and religious barriers.
Sam August 28, 2012 at 11:47 PM
Godguy, I'm sure our Native American friends would wish you white 'Christian' would go back from where you came from.
GodGuy316 August 29, 2012 at 12:21 AM
Oh yeah?
GodGuy316 August 29, 2012 at 12:26 AM
Sam I bet you are some Islam or something and you hate America because why else would you say that Indians would want me to leave? I am a white Christian and I was born here like my parents and there parents. Indians were here to watch the land before gods people could come to claim it. Don't like it? They should have left when we warned them and went back to there home. Hell they have pechanga now so why are you all wining. There aint nothing wrong with being Indian but non offense why are they trying to claim the land from the real Americans who helped them become normal people and not wild Indians?
GodGuy316 August 29, 2012 at 12:30 AM
And why don't you explain why Indians have such a hard time going to church and prying to god all mighty and Jesus who is also god in flesh? I aint never seen proof of a great spirit or sacred eagle but i no that god is proved an noone can deny that scientific fact. Mexicans pray to Mary and islams pray to Allah and Indians pray to whatever and they are all praying to satan if they don't pray to Jesus Christ and well i guess the don't no about hell and that is why we have to teach them before it is to late.
GodGuy316 August 29, 2012 at 12:33 AM
That ain't even the point of this story it's about a woman probably a feminist who thinks she don't need a man to protect her from a sex crazy man from another country and now everyone is crying about this shit.
Michelle Smith September 24, 2012 at 07:14 PM
I hope this will serve as a startling experience to all of us parents out there regarding the safety and protection of our children. I have two daughters and I always ensure their safety everyday from any form of danger. Thanks to my sister who introduced to me a mobile application from Safetrec if ever in danger. Just pressing a button they can notify and alert friends,family and myself. If needed, the call will be routed to the nearest 911 dispatch. Protect your children check this out http://SafeTREC.com/

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »