tvc184

I like the idea of armed teachers but that guy’s logic is terribly flawed.

TGM is now Tom Cruise’s highest grossing movie worldwide of all time. In the short time it has been open, it earned $817 Million. Another $200M would put it the top 30 movies ever.

I don’t know how the “I” got in there except predictive text. The Sugarland Express incident started in Port Arthur.

Which started in Port Arthur…,

There you go with “you guys”. 1. Declaring martial law is a stupid claim. 2. I don’t recall any time saying anything about martial law. I honestly can’t remember anyone in this forum claiming that Obama was going to declare martial law to seize guns. Maybe you read such an opinion somewhere else. If someone else here said that, again it is a stupid claim. 3. Quite to the contrary, I laughed when Obama came up with his many point executive order because I said his orders would have no enforcement under law. 4. The Democrats absolutely want to end most private ownership of our arms and the president today will gladly sign such a bill but the Senate does not have enough votesto overcome the filibuster. 5. if I said, you know how you people are, you would be having a fit.

Haha…. I did not modify your post. I was correcting a typo in mine but reading it off of your post. When I looked back at it, it said I modified yours. I thought, when did I modify his post… Then… Oops

It is a lot of resources and they might have had no clue if it was minor. In all chases, it isn’t necessarily the known crime but the ending which may end up in a shooting. Timothy McVeigh who blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City, was stopped on a license plate violation. I was reading an officer patrol tactics case called the “no look, look”. It is when a person goes out of his way not to look at the police. In the particular case they used as an example, a guy pulled up to a Farm Road at a stop sign. A State trooper was straight across from him also just waiting to cross the farm road. The civilian driver would never even look across the road at the trooper. He would not even look left to see if the highway was clear before. He looked continuously to the right but would never looked back to the left because he thought the trooper might be looking at him. The driver then crossed the farm roads highway have a never looked to the left to see if it was clear. The trooper stopped the guy and what did he find in the trunk? The guy‘s dead wife who he had just murdered. Two routine stops for traffic citations type offenses for ended up in a domestic violence murder case being solved and a mass murder being solved. Like those two cases, it’s not the reason for the stop, even for a chase that is the, it is what might happen when it comes to a conclusion.

Facebook probably giving them some grief.

I believe you’re talking about the wrong rednecks. For all I know during the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia might have called people rednecks but that ain’t what they are talking about in the southern United States.

I and likely many other people have been saying that for years. There is a push to make illegal aliens citizens and even to have aliens vote. That is because I believe about 75% of Hispanics vote Democrat. The opening of the border is nothing but the importation of votes trying to lock up all future national elections. If however if we found that 70% of Hispanics entering the country wanted to vote for a Republican candidate, you would see that border slammed shut immediately.

Next up, what happens when a middle school football team plays a junior league/Pop Warner football team?

Misuse is correct but away from the topic. Your definition is wrong to say the least. It is not religion based.

Freedom of choice….. unless I disagree.

The article that I read (maybe Beaumont Enterprise?) said it had a concession stand, restrooms and a dressing room. I’m assuming the dressing room has some type of locker room and maybe even showers but the article did not exactly say. But yes, it was not like a typical small stand-alone building to serve chips and drinks.

An average of 350 people are killed with rifles of any type each year. That is not bad shooting, it is all rifle homicides. There are about 9,000 gun murders each year. If you could remove every single rifle from every single person‘s hand in the United States, you were at the most take away 4% of the murders. That is only assuming that the person simply won’t go to a shotgun or handgun. You know that is BS because if a person can’t get his hand on a rifle, he would just go to another firearm. I can only think of one school shooting with a rifle had anything to do with it what really made a difference. That was an 11-year-old and a 13-year-old in Arkansas about 30 years ago where they stayed away from the school and pulled the fire alarm and shot people as they came out from long range. Just like the Luby‘s in Killeen, Texas and the Virginia Tech shooter, it was all handguns. They are actually easier to conceal, much easier to carry large quantities of ammo and up close where most of the shootings happen, just as deadly and usually faster. To put it in a nutshell, this is an attempt to band raffles when rifles are not the problem. Had this shooter going into the same classroom in Uvalde with a 9 mm handgun, he could have killed just as many children, just as fast. What will restricting AR15‘s due to that? Absolutely nothing. Klebold and Harris went into Columbine HS in the first well known HS mass shooting and they were under age to buy handguns yet they had handguns. How could that be, it wasn’t legal??? Anyone that cannot see this as getting a foot in the door to try to get guns away from private citizens, is not paying much attention. I guess this is the reality or logic in some people’s minds. I kid has severe mental problems and says I’m going to go shoot up a school. He finds out that he cannot get his hands on a rifle but he can get his hands on a pistol. He then gives up on his plans because he does not want to kill 30 children with a handgun.

I will throw this out there, I haven’t looked into juvenile law in maybe 6 years or so. Those are the laws as I believe they still exist. If somebody can say that yes they changed the law on what should be reported, I am not aware of it. I used to have the office number and personal cell phone number for the head of the Juvenile Division for the DA. Anytime I had a question I would contact that person direct. Like I said, it has been a few years since I have made inquiries into the current Texas law but I believe they are still the same.

Like all state laws, it varies state by state. In Texas juvenile records are sealed and not considered a crime. They are charged with Delinquent Conduct and a criminal act justifies the DC charges. If a child is certified as an adult for example at 15 years old, it is then part of his official adult record. However, once certified, not always certified. If certified by a judge, a juvenile is only an adult for that crime. So a 15 is taken into custody for felony Aggravated Assault. A judge certifies him an adult and he gets a trial date just like any other adult. So the trial is set for 8 months later. The day after he is certified, be gets out and is arrested for another crime. Yep, he is a juvenile again. It is not like being emancipated. So when talking about school records and juvenile laws, it goes state by state. For a federal background check to show such a school or juvenile records, you would need a new law. You would need some kind of mandatory school records, juvenile records national database law for it to show up. Good luck with that. A state could enact such a law that only applies to that state. I don’t envision that happening in Texas.

A 17 year old in Texas is not a juvenile. Terroristic Threat is a misdemeanor. Being kicked out of school has no known tracking record that I have ever heard of that would show up on a background check. Part of a problem (not necessarily shootings) in general is that schools at least in my experience, either cover up or fail to report or take action on crimes. As an example, I was working at a school as an off duty job and witnessed an assault. It was not even a fight but just an assault. A teacher tried to step between two students and one reached over the teacher and hit the other one face. Student that got hit was being intimidated by the other or basically bullied. After my partner and I arrested the 18 year old student, the school officials tried to intervene, have us let the guy go and allow them to handle it. Uhhhhhh…… no. I believe that is a regular occurrence. Right or wrong? We can argue the point but it happens and probably way more than anyone can guess.

…. And the consequences for hitting her is a class A misdemeanor. If they “threw the book at him”, the maximum is “up to” one year in jail and/or “up to” a $4000 fine. So the minimum has to be at least a $1 fine or at least one day in jail. So a judge or jury can say, we find you guilty and sentence you to one day in jail or we fine you $1.

I knocked the crap out of a woman one time. I hit her hard enough that it knocked the curlers from her hair. It looked like a mushroom ring in the front yard. I don’t exactly remember but I think I might have slapped the heck out of her daughter. We were trying to arrest a guy who ran from a stolen car. As one officer was trying to put handcuffs on him in the front yard, mama came up behind the officer can try to grab him by the neck. I hit her so her daughter (who I think was 16 years old and about 180 pounds) grabbed me by the hand to keep me for my resting her mother. She grabbed onto my thumb to pull me away and dislocated it. A female trying to choke my partner and another dislocating my thumb qualified for being hit in my opinion.

You are pretty much correct. We don’t have to actually see a person drive but….. We can justify an arrest if for example an accident just happened and we can find evidence that he was driving. In police or DA language (cop talk) we call it putting him behind the wheel. It can be from witnesses, physical evidence, still in seatbelt, video, etc. There was video of the guy but does it prove his level of intoxication? A guy at home a day or even an hour later? No. It is near impossible to prove that he wasn’t just tired and had a beer or two and then went home and was worried about the accident and started drinking. Drinking after an accident can not be used as evidence in DWI.

More wokism…...

An interesting take on history (woke or revisionist?)…. [Hidden Content]

He is still pretty far left. He apparently still has the ability to see the utter BS that is taking place. Much of what the Democrats are backing is utter BS and he knows it. Good for him for saying some things but his political stance hasn’t changed.

Yeah, he’s an idiot