tvc184

I know a person that was a witness to this incident and gave a statement to the police. Like him, I don't know the officer, the deceased or any other person involved. He said that the deceased definitely had a baseball bat and several times the off duty officer told him to drop the bat. The deceased did not and was shot.

My thoughts are that he is a crybaby, and we have had them in electors in the past, who wants his 1.5 seconds of fame. He is not the first nor will he be the last elector to violate his promise.

My understanding of a problem lifestyle has no bearing on my belief for repayment. Bullets13 has ridden with me a few times on patrol including times that I and other officers have been confronted physically. See if he thinks I am tough in my opinion and approach to people if he will comment on it. Also see if he believes that I am lenient in my opinion of police officers that make obvious mistakes.

I said that drug addicts are like gambling addicts. Is that wrong? I have no clue about your BISD claims other than lumping me in with other people. I said this woman should pay for her crime. I have seen too many cases like this in Texas courts get probation and I do not agree with it but that is what often happens. I said that if she gets probation then people would be angry and rightfully so. Where has my experience made this an invalid post? Yes, I think you read too much into it.

What were my comments on BISD?

I cannot agree with this.It is wrong and improper. It is White House, not Whitehouse.

That is not what I said. I was listing things that conservatives and liberals argue over and I can understand the disagreements. It is the stupid SJW comments that I don't get.

Is that some kind of triumph of spirit that makes straight party Democrats feel good about themselves? Trump won over a woman that was supposed to be so powerful that she was unbeatable. Since she was possibly the worst candidate in 50 years from either party, now you have a cad that is soon to occupy the White House. His term will be for the next four years. Going over his past exploits about woman will not change that. Trump's only message was "I am against the establishment" and that carried him past 16 Republicans and the smartest woman in the world. Maybe the Dems and some Republicans should take notes..........

What in the world does that have to do with SJW which is what you quoted?

I believe that many or maybe a majority of people on the left are social justice warriors. I understand beliefs like more welfare or other social programs need to distribute wealth better, taxes ought to be doled out differently and slanting it more toward the well off, should scale back our military ([part of the same thing perhaps ), right to abortions or we should all tighten our belts so others could benefit. I might not agree with it but I can appreciate the opinion. Some of the nonsense that I see in my belief is instigating an argument for the sake of an argument or an SJW.

I had to look up who the current Secretary of the Treasury was. I had no clue. I am sure that I have seen his name a couple of times but it isn't exactly a hot button issue. So no, I would not have cared. For all I knew Mnuchin could have been the current secretary under Obama. Has it ever dawned on you that the USA elected a billionaire who beyond being extremely rich, has never lived like a middle class family and has never even sought public office before? WOW, a billionaire that many people voted for because he was a billionaire and a businessman is hiring rich people to run his programs. Stunning, utterly stunning. I thought he was ask Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid who they would like selected. I do not agree with it and never have but many people wanted an outsider that had run businesses. That is what he ran on and that is exactly what he is doing.

Are you aware that Castro installed nuclear missiles and brought us to as close to nuclear war as at any time in world history? Castro has not been avoided by every president since Eisenhower because he is a communist or ruthless. We routinely deal with such people but not ones that are 50 miles away and almost brought the world to destruction. It isn't like LBJ, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton as Democratic presidents loved to deal with Castro and then Nixon, Reagan, Bush and Bush were against it because of politics. All presidents for almost 60 years has kept away from Castro and it was one of the rare cases where almost everyone agreed .... until the apologist in chief came along. Nah.... probably not.

No.

Facts slow down the discussion.

Internment camps for the Chinese? I knew it was them that bombed Pearl Harbor and not the Japanese but we needed an excuse to go to work so we could get cheap Ramen noodles. And the Trump elections brings us back to the times of slavery and working on plantations? Geez.............. The sad part about it is that some will see this, believe it and use it as a talking point on internet forums.

As usual you spit out gibberish on something a person claimed on facebook that you took as fact or perhaps you made iu up. In 2004 G W Bush beat John Kerry just over 3 million votes. [Hidden Content],_2004 In another two elections the Republicans have won without the majority. I think that is beyond cool. In two of those elections Clinton got a plurality but never the majority. So.... you are correct in 4 out of 7 elections and two of those were won by the Republicans. Great try though.

She is a criminal and will pay some kind of price. That simply needs to happen. Like drug addicts, they have such a compulsion that they will grab anything of value that they can get their hands on to fill that addiction. I doubt that she targeted school kids though. I have seen drug addicts have a parent by a brand new big screen television and when they come home from work the first day it has been sold on the street for $20 for two hits of crack cocaine. The people don't hate their parents and it truly does hurt them inside but their addiction overcomes their rational behavior. I don't think they are evil in who they target but will grab any money seen hanging around and in this case, it happened to belong to school children. I hope she pays but in my experience and in many cases they get probation. That is paying under the law but it doesn't satisfy a lot of people and maybe rightfully so.

I hope he affects my healthcare by dropping the insurance premiums back to pre-Obama disaster levels. Other than that, I agree except you forgot guns.........

If you are asking me, honestly I have no clue what happened. I've seen lots of rumors and accusations. No matter what happened, the DA has the discretion over prosecution and what he feels is in the "interest of justice". I've worked cases where technically a crime could be proven but under the circumstances, it was understandable not to prosecute. As it says in the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the duty of the DA is not to prosecute all crimes but to seek justice in a particular situation. Art. 2.01. DUTIES OF DISTRICT ATTORNEYS. Each district attorney shall represent the State in all criminal cases in the district courts of his district and in appeals therefrom, except in cases where he has been, before his election, employed adversely. When any criminal proceeding is had before an examining court in his district or before a judge upon habeas corpus, and he is notified of the same, and is at the time within his district, he shall represent the State therein, unless prevented by other official duties. It shall be the primary duty of all prosecuting attorneys, including any special prosecutors, not to convict, but to see that justice is done. They shall not suppress facts or secrete witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused. So even if the DA could maybe get charges past a jury, in some situations it might not be the best answer. The law is generally black and white. The correct response to those laws is not always so clear.

The law used to say that you have to prove that the person did it for sexual purposes as it does in many laws. There had to be the intent to have "sexual gratification" for any person. They changed the law that the only required is intent to invade privacy. That is it. There has to be no other intent to use the photos or video and there is no defense to prosecution that you were trying to catch a thief. Also under wiretapping, it even specifically mentions law enforcement to try and stop crimes (much more serious than misdemeanor theft). Even if attempting to stop a crime, it is a crime to record anyone without consent of at least one person in the conversation or without a warrant/judge's order.

It depends on how what you call criminal. By law, yes they all should be. Entry into the USA without the lawfully required documentation is against the law. Under that law you should be deported and if you reenter, it is a crime that carries a prison sentence. Under the current administration we do not deport found illegal aliens. Oh yeah, we do if we stop them at the border. Once they get past the Border Patrol, they are free to roam even if caught. That is not the law but what the current administration allows to happen. In a way they are getting a presidential pardon for criminal reentry as the current administration refuses to enforce those laws. It is like saying that DWI is legal because the local police department does not like to get tied up with those long winded arrests and simply refuses to make them and instead gets the offender a ride home. So, it is criminal for many and should be criminal for the rest once they are found by the police. I am assuming that soon many or most of those getting a pass in the criminal law will not be doing so. From the previous administration I can assure you that if I found an illegal alien and placed a hold on the person, it would be dealt with. Now? They don't even want to hear about it. We can actually catch an illegal alien in a crime and unless it is a felony, the current administration will not deport the person, much less file charges.

Trump obviously espoused hate by saying that he was against illegal aliens and terrorists. The Dems have a soft spot for criminals and to say anything against them is hate.

Gambling takes a lot of 'em down.

More like the people went from hope and change to hope for a change.

Just a tad of a problem with your post. You posted a law that no longer exists. Oops!! Now go peruse the actual law and see what you highlighted that no longer exists. If it helps, look up the 2015 legislature and SB 1317.