tvc184

The "threat" in the article in the first post is not a terroristic that by Texas law. That law says it is a violation to make a threat of "imminent" death or serious bodily injury. Imminent is not defined in the Penal Code so we have to go to the dictionary. Imminent means about to happen or likely to occur at any moment. The article says that the Panthers say that "if" the police don't stop doing certain things then sometime in the future they will respond. That is hardly an "imminent" threat. We get similar calls all the time with conditional threats. "If you don't stop doing this, I am going to start doing that". There is a component of a threat there but it does not come close to a threat of something that is about to happen or in other words, imminent.

There is no system in place to help people that are having mental issues. The police can pick up anyone for screening at a psychiatric facility without a warrant and a person can be held for up to 3 days (I think) and then released. They are usually or many times put on meds that tend to help alleviate the problem. What happens many times after that is the person is released, usually to the streets and then the person quits taking the meds. You are then back at square one. This is often repeated time and time again for many years. Most never turn very violent but on rare occasion it can turn bad. The days of putting someone that has serious mental issues in a facility to long term detentions (sometimes a lifetime) do not exist anymore. Families often have a hard time dealing with them, possibly for just getting tired after years of the behavior or perhaps out of fear of confrontation.

Great. How many of those third party candidates have won and how many times have you ended up with the lesser of evils? The third party candidate is the dupe. "Vote for me!! I have absolutely no chance of winning anything but I can certainly give you a place to throw away your vote if you are looking to stomp your feet I protest!".

I have very little knowledge about kayaks but I see a kayak club meeting sometimes when I go to Daley's in Nederland. I think it is the Salt Water Boys kayak club and they have a weekly or monthly meeting there. I think they could provide a lot of face to face information to someone looking to get into it for a hobby. I see that they have a link to their homepage on Daley's website. You could also read their forums at www.saltwaterboysfishing.com You can also go to Daley's site at daleyshf.com under events and find a link to the club's tournament schedule. I know that you are not likely concerned about tournament fishIng but am guessing that those guys are a wealth of information.

Laying out facts will get you nowhere in a political argument.

I love the comments on Facebook from all the sidewalk lawyers and police officers.

Did your mother have any children that lived?

Only by being protected by the Obama adminstration. As soon as he decides, the DOJ will probably get her indicted. If Biden decides to stay on the sidelines, she will probably escape.

I am sure it is all about Chelsea's wedding, Bill's bimbos and other stuff that had nothing to do with national security.

Right.... and I have the Statue of Liberty up for sale.... cheap. Make me an offer.

[Hidden Content]

The law says that it is capital murder to kill a police officer who is " acting in the lawful discharge of an official duty". It depends on what is decided as an official duty. I think that it means you're on duty or acting as a police officer at that moment and were killed because you were a police officer. I think his attorney is trying to make the point that the officer had to be taking some kind of official action. I do not believe that is the law and certainly not how it was intended. Being on duty "is" acting as a peace officer. As an example in San Antonio about 4 years ago a deputy was killed while sitting at a red light. He was taking no action other than driving but the suspect was charged and went to trial for Capital Murder. What "official act" was he taking other than patrolling, which to me is an "official duty". That is what lawyers do, try to figure out some angle. I don't think it will work however.

Good.

You do realize that you have made a conclusion of what others did based solely on your assumptions. I am sure that it had nothing to do with a bunch of wires attached to a circuit board inside of a briefcase. Obviously anyone could have seen that and determined that it was a clock.

Obviously this has gone over your head.

This kind of nonsense is what started all the standardized testing in the first place.

Therein lies his problem. When his jokes run out in a month or so, will he actually say anything that makes any sense or will it still simply be, "trust me" ..... which is almost exact what we heard from Obama and his claims to "fundamentally" change this country. And I am not completely against Trump. I think we could do worse and currently are doing worse. I don't buy the idea that he is an "outsider" and not a politician as the main reason to vote for him. He would be almost nothing had it not been for his already being established as a celebrity.

I think the vast majority love the reality tv aspect to Trump. I don't buy the "he isn't a politician" angle. Neither was Reagan when he was an actor. Neither was Jimmy Carter when he was a peanut farmer. Neither was Mike Huckabee when he was a preacher. Neither was G H W Bush when he was an oil wildcatter. When they ran for office, they became politicians. So if Trump gets elected, he isn't a politician in the highest political office in the land? Sure he will be and sure he is now. In reality he is a politician that has not yet held political office. You talk about unfulfilled promises. Okay, I'll buy that. Trump says "I'll do this and I'll do that, trust me!". Well how is he going to do it if Congress will not pass the law? If the Republicans hold both houses (which seems likely) me might have a more favorable Congress to work with however any of the Republicans will be in the same position. Trump reminds me a lot of Obama. "Trust me". Like, trust me, I will make the world love us and not make them all mad. How did that work out for us? You talk about a fresh perspective yet Trump has no perspective other than, trust me because I am The Donald. I do think that he would be a lot better than Obama but I think the same thing about my mother's Siamese Cat.

That is what the entire campaign has been so far, much less tonight's debate. Trump has skewed the actual media coverage of a political campaign to see what his next one liner will be. He doesn't say nearly as much as others besides "trust me" but he seems to get more air time than the other 15 candidates combined. I am not yet sure if it is good or bad but it is happening.

QX is in the public relations business and usually on the wrong side of an argument. He sees the opportunity and has jumped at it. Three officers were killed so far this year in Houston/Harris County and five since 2013 with Deputy Goforth simply being the latest. I wonder why he chose this one and not the others for such a humanitarian.

It sounds more like another "I hate you" shooting that happens to be at a school.

Go ahead. Don't be ashamed. So you like to use Clorox 2 instead of regular chlorine bleach?

I know that both sides exploit any political advantage. But let's look at the elections since Bill Clinton first ran. Clinton beat sitting president G H W Bush who was 68. Then he beat Bob Dole at 73. When young Obama ran in his first election in 2004, it was the same thing with 68 year old John McCain. In all of those elections I heard it many times, the GOP was the party of stodgy old white guys. That was not like the Democratic party with the young vibrant 46 year old Bill Clinton or the 43 year old Obama in 2004. The party of youth and the young vote was taking over. Well, here we are in 2015 and the front runner still (at the moment) is Hillary Clinton who is a relative youngster with the Democrat possibles at 67. We have what appears to be her most serious challenge with Bernie Sanders at 74 (remembering that the Dems said that Reagan was "too old" when he ran at 69). The one that many people seem to want to jump in to save the election is Biden at 73. The other real serious contender like Biden also hasn't jumped in but many far lefters want Elizabeth (well, I really thought I Native America) Warren who is almost the same age at 66. Of course there is 52 year old Martin O'Malley but I think that about 95% of the Democrat voters will say, "Martin who?". Compare that against Marco Rubio at 44, Ted Cruz at 44, Chris Christie at 53, Bobby Jindal at 44, Rand Paul at 52, Rick Santorum at 57 and Scott Walker at 47. Of course the GOP might opt for an almost youngster (compared to the Dems field) of Carly Fiorina just turned 61, or the older Ben Carson at 63 or Don Trump at 69. They have the option for a lot younger candidate if they wish and I suspect will eventually win. When the candidates start dropping (which has already started), more of the establishment vote will start pulling away from Trump, Carson or Fiorina. Even if not, two of those three are in their early 60's. I am assuming that the Dems will not bring up old out of touch candidates in this election. At least the Dems have updated a bit. They are not the party of stodgy old white guys, now they can add stodgy old women.

You mean the establishment because the voters are looking hard at Trump or Carson?

Vollies...............