Here’s a fun fact: The man who hijacked the Los Angeles transit bus on Sept. 25, killed a passenger, and held the driver at gunpoint had been arrested previously.

There were two drug trafficking convictions.

But that was not the piece de resistance. The man accused of the horrific transit bus crime had been arrested for two violent offenses.

And given he was in La-La Land, the district attorney was George Gascon.

Lamont Campbell, the man who is the suspect in the crime that partially channeled the 1994 movie “Speed”, is the poster child for passage of Proposition 36 in the Nov. 5 election.

Proposition 36, on next month’s ballot, is destined to be the third rail of California politics just as Proposition 13 became in 1978.

Proposition 36 undoes some of the handiwork that a lot of prominent politicians take credit for in both Sacramento and back in DC.

The 2014 measure was pushed as a promise to reduce crime.

It decriminalized some drug crimes.

It also made the the theft of anything under $950 a misdemeanor and not a felony.

What did that lead to?

Embolden groups of criminals looting Ulta Beauty, Targets, and Nordstrom’s et al.

Gangs of teens and pre-teens swarming 7-Elevens and such, like locust.

Homeless people on drugs taking over blocks in bigger cities.

It was all in the name of social justice.

There were those in Sacramento that for years ignored pleas to tweak their great experiment that was partially going sideways.

But then the mayhem kept escalating.

Soon drug stores, chain restaurants, and speciality grocery stores were throwing in the towels.

It seemed they didn’t like the price they had to pay for social justice.

The politicians in control disagreed.

They insisted the corporate types were playing Chicken Little and the victims were those “forced” to steal and not them.

So the victims of crimes who were told they weren’t really victims started collecting signatures to qualify a measure to alter the 2014 proposition’s biggest shortcomings.

All of a sudden the politicians started seeing the light, sort of.

They advanced legislation to try and side track the initiative.

But, in shades of the lead up to passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, the politicians tried to sweet talk those supporting the new crime initiative fix to back off.

And just like in 1978, they didn’t.

So here we are 19 days before the election.

A UC Berkeley Institute of Studies poll shows Proposition 36 leading by 3 to 1.

And the support is strongest among Latinos.

As far as Gascon, who was  the architect of directing prosecutors not to try those charged with a laundry list of crimes against law-abiding citizens after winning election four years ago, things aren’t looking up.

The same poll shows him trailing his opponent in his re-election campaign on Nov. 5 by 30 points.

The man he is trailing is Nathan Hochman.

Hochman was an assistant attorney general under none other than President George W. Bush.

Imagine that.

A Bush appointee could become district attorney of Los Angeles County, of all places.

That’s what myopic runaway social justice can do.

So what has happened in California since passage of Proposition 47 that made shoplifing a misdemeanor in 2014?

Violent crime in Los Angeles alone has surged 35 percent since 2014.

That’s roughly four times higher than what happened nationally.

So what will Proposition 36 do if it passes?

For starters, it won’t gut Proposition 47.

What it does is fix its biggest imperfections.

It restores accountability.

It starts with shoplifters.

For those with two or more theft convictions, can be charged with felonies.

There would be longer sentences for organized crimes such as store takeovers, flash mob robberies — to name a few.

The Nov. 5 measure allows prosecutors to charge those found with possessing illegal drugs with a “treatment mandated felony.” And that is only if they have two or more past convictions for drug charges.

That’s not locking up the convicted and throwing away the key.

It’s real social justice.

Measured social justice.

But that hasn’t stopped Gov. Newsom and his allies from contending the Nov. 5 ballot measure somehow being a revival of the war on drugs.

Does that sound like one strike and you’re out?

And the third strike doesn’t toss them into prison.

Instead, it is mandatory treatment.

It is social justice, not carte blanche to ignore the laws of civilization, and not lock them up and throw the keys away.

The original Three Strikes law had flaws.

Someone accumulating a third low-level felony for theft getting seven years in prison wasn’t measured justice.

Unfortunately, those that authored Proposition 47 in 2014 didn’t aim for a well-balanced approach in that “crime reform” initiative when it came to the scales of justice.

Instead of targeting a middle, reasonable approach the scales went from being tipped against many victims to being tipped in favor of many criminals.

Perhaps that is what frightens Newsom and others in Sacramento when it comes to the Nov. 5 ballot measure.

Proposition 36 is even keel approach.

The more extreme tenets of the social justice  movement are not being embraced.

But then neither is the equally short-sighted lock ‘em up period mentality.

As such, the measure could be seen as a threat to the political agenda of those in power in Sacramento just like Proposition 13’s passage 46 years ago.

Support for Proposition 36 is a strong mixture of Democrats, Republicans, and independents.

It is a strong mix of liberal, conservative, and moderate voters.

As such it’s passage could signal conditions exist for more moderate politics to take hold in Sacramento.

And as far as some opponents of the measure are concerned, that is the real “crime”.

This column is the opinion of editor, Dennis Wyatt, and does not necessarily represent the opinions of The Bulletin or 209 Multimedia. He can be reached at dwyatt@mantecabulletin.com