tvc184

Here is one that lists PA (from a "reader/resident" observation). [Hidden Content] Here is one that I looked at that lists League CIty (and also Port Arthur). This is the one that I was talking about. There are some great quotes from the anonymous source that shows LC is a sanctuary. Here are a couple of them... "Mayor Randall & Chief Jez believe that these law breakers have the constitutional right to a Peaceful Assemble regardless of their, "Status.” Wow, simply horrible. They have constitutional rights. And another..."..this has become out of hand. GOD Bless America". It looks like some racist guy doesn't like people protesting in "his" city. Maybe he also doesn't understand the law that even if the protesters were illegal aliens, the local police cannot arrest them for that. Yet that anonymous "tip" now shows League City, TX on some sites as a sanctuary city because the police did not arrest protesters. I don't like the current administrations policy for dealing with illegals. I put little faith in websites that makes claims of where they can walk around free without fear of being deported. That is likely true but not because of any city but because the current occupant of the White House has declared the entire country a sanctuary.

I question some of the validity of that map or their criteria. While I think San Francisco, CA has publicly stated something to the effect that they will not contact ICE, even that is somewhat up for argument. It shows Travis County in TX as sanctuary due to "not honoring ICE detainer without accompanying criminal charge". What I find strange about that is that under the current administration, we can't beg a detainer from ICE. We do have criminal charges and they will not get involved. If ICE will not pick up a prisoner from the state that is charged with a crime, under what kind of detainer are they asking Travis County to hold them on "without a criminal charge"? Also I saw several websites that listed Port Arthur as a sanctuary city. Why? Someone reported it. Like.... "I think that PA doesn't enforce immigration laws" or something to that effect. I saw one that listed League City over by Galveston as a sanctuary. The verification? A person (the site says unnamed for safety) said that those people are gathering to protest and the police are not arresting them. Hmmmm..... I am not saying that sanctuary cities do not exist and I am sure that many local/county politicians do not want to enforce existing laws as it might cost votes but as an official policy, I would need more than reading it on an internet site. Bonjour!

​We all know that it is coming back eventually but the article posted was from before all the shutdowns. The "limited" run is from the AL plant and even that has no date to be put back on shelves.

​From an article 3 months ago?

​Of course you could take his name out and replace it with anyone else on trial and be true for about 98% of the time.

​I think it is more than appearance. The police chief dictates the way officers act by his direction in policy, discipline and backing. Of course this mayor might want a yes man (or woman) and not a real leader but chiefs go a long way in dictating police response and that includes retaliation against him by officers in their response to crimes. If a person wants to be a successful police chief then making 90% of your officers mad is not a good career enhancer. Or as a former coworker said to a deputy chief in my department a few years ago, "I was here when you were hired and I will be here when you leave". That turned out to be correct by several years.............

As a line officer that hates internal politics in police work, I love this story of the police chief (they call a commissioner) being terminated. He recently called for forcing officers out and he was going to make officers do their jobs. Now the only one that is out is the chief. I hope for the officer's sake that someone is hired that will back up the officers. I am not talking about turning a blind eye to corrupt officers but not one that goes on record with what is perceived by officers as a blanket criticism of the officers.

​I am a police officer and I get uncomfortable when a police car is behind me.

​Yes but I just think that it is stupid to strap a gun on your hip and walk around town. I think it has more to do with testosterone than safety or the Second Amendment.

​Mark me in the "against" category.

From the photos in the article, it appears that all of the victims are either Hispanic or black. One was a 7 year old child. In that case the father is a known gang member with 45 previous arrests and is said not to be cooperating with the police in trying to find the killer of his child. I am curious at what point black lives matter. Is it only determined by the race or occupation of the person who did the killing (even if entirely legal)? I think that is the point of people posting these kinds of articles. Is it selective outrage when people from a particular ethnic group can be slaughtered on a regular basis and essentially ignored but let the person responsible be a racist or police officer and it becomes a national incident requiring a presidential response?

​I would call it progress. I think an article from last year showed 82 shot and 15 dead. That is about a 35% reduction in victims......

​I has passed. Nothing to discuss any more.

Like they say, the funniest jokes are at or close to the truth.

....... because they left the light on for them.

As a matter of fact if you are talking about the Colorado case, the baker offered to make any other item than a cake. Again, it is not the customer or the sin itself but being forced to back it up with a celebration cake for it.

​He isn't banning customers. He is not wanting to make a cake for the sin. Yes your comment might hold some water if he was asked to make a Fornicator's Cake, a Liar's Cake, etc. It is making the cake to celebrate the sin that he is against, not the sinner.

​Post it? Sure. Enforce it? Maybe.... according who is banned and if it violates the federal civil rights acts such as race, national origin, sex (but not sexual preference.... yet), religion, etc.

Actions have consequences.

​Some of the biggest hogwash that I have read. Kind of like, "We only wanted information". That is too funny. The people disregarded any information that was pro-police and as the DOJ later found out, was almost entirely correct.

Basically the "unarmed man" doesn't apply so much to an escapee.

​Each state has their own laws however I will quote TX law as a comparison. The mere fact that a person is escaping is almost deemed as justification for deadly force. I work with several officers that that worked for the TX prison system (TDCJ) and they were told that if they see a person going over the wire or already out, to fire one warning shot (not required by law) and then the second shots puts the person down for good. Escape from prison in itself is a deadly force potential. That is why they have guns on the guard towers... it is not just for show. In this case we have a guy that is still trying to escape and in fact is in prison for life for killing a police officer. I am going to guess that by NY law (like similar to TX), unless the guy immediately gets on the ground when ordered by a guard or police officer, deadly force is usually authorized. The officers can't just murder them but can use deadly force to prevent escape by law. Sec. 9.52. PREVENTION OF ESCAPE FROM CUSTODY. The use of force to prevent the escape of an arrested person from custody is justifiable when the force could have been employed to effect the arrest under which the person is in custody, except that a guard employed by a correctional facility or a peace officer is justified in using any force, including deadly force, that he reasonably believes to be immediately necessary to prevent the escape of a person from the correctional facility.

NBC has shown that lying is not a problem. They are only mad that Williams made it public. Trump did not use any racial slurs or say anything strange or derogatory. He told the truth which is that Mexico's best citizens are not coming across the border...... and that simply will not work, especially to a network that panders to liberals. I am sure they are afraid that if they did not try to get rid of Trump, it would somehow translate into bad ratings in their upcoming presidential election slanted coverage both on NBC and MSNBC.

​He doesn't talk about them. He fans the flames.

That article is some of the biggest hogwash that I have ever read. It ends up by saying something like, "Well, Congress can't really change it but cut off the money and we can do anything against Supreme Court rulings". Really? Obama hasn't signed a budget since he has been the president. We have seen how well shutting down the government works. People that are in fear of losing their welfare checks will again blame the Republicans and with an election looming. Returning the Democrats to control over Congress would then do what for this idea? The entire premise is gibberish. I don't agree with the ruling but the threat of shutting down the government indefinitely is laughable.