tvc184

I still see the building when I go to Sam's.

Drake's onion rings........ Or across the street, the Baker-Wliford Pharmacy lunch counter.

Why? I don't issue citations on my cell phone.

I was on my cell phone and looking at the Ferguson Effect in the Political Forum and when I tried to reply, somehow I ended up on this page.

That was part of their jingle on the television commercials. "Burger Chef, for a nickle and a dime......."

I could have been but I just don't remember. It was a double meat and kind of like a Big Mac but about 20 times better. That could have been the Big Chef.

Yes, I remember BC. It was my favorite burger place but I do not remember the name of the hamburger that I liked the best (but I swear that I can still taste it). Since it was built as a BC where Hamburger Depot is today about a block from Bulldog Stadium, I would walk there at halftime at every Nederland home game.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. The police, the district attorney and a criminal jury have looked at it and they all disagree with you.

I was an officer in MO this week and they were having a major police presence staging for an expected major incident in Ferguson.

Again you draw conclusions that have not been posted. No one said it was "the norm", no one said that they would do it in the same situation and no one said that Neil chose the least confrontational approach. The only thing that he did was reach for a door. Maybe he did it to expose her to criminal charges. Maybe he did it to make her look stupid. Maybe he just wanted in the room. No one can read his mind. Whatever his intent, he did not break the law and she did by blocking a door and then from my perspective, by shoving Neil on the way out.

Why would my mother or wife be blocking the door to a public meeting? Why would I want to defend either if it happened? If it happened to anyone in my family I would be very angry. I would be outraged that one of my relatives would be so stupid.

That is exactly what I was talking about. Just because somebody could have done something differently does not make the person wrong. Well, maybe it does if you're looking for an excuse to blame someone else.

People always want to discuss what "could" have been done differently. That is the way to take the blame off of the guilty. It is like a man running a stop sign and killing someone. Then you blame the dead guy because had he taken time to look both ways as a reasonable person would be for crossing an intersection, he would have seen the car about to run the stop sign. It is the victim who is at fault for causing his own death and not the person that ran the stop sign. That is nonsense. When and officer tells you to get out of a car did you do it because it is the law. It does not matter if the officer could have been nicer. When a person is blocking the door and another person reaches to open it, it is the person that blocked the door that caused the entire incident not whether the other guy should've backed off, been nicer or called the police instead. You don't like the fact that Neil reached around Haynes to open the door and it caused her to be convicted in court. There is one person responsible for the entire turn of events and she was found guilty. Blaming the victim won't change that.

By the extra cost of a death penalty trial and all associated appeals.

It is cheaper to have life in prison.

Then on the video, she is seen assaulting him all the way out (assuming that he was offended). Had he wish to file charges then she would have likely been convicted of that also.

I did not say anything about according to logic. I stated the law. It is against the law in Texas to block a passageway. Unless a person who is ordering from the menu is doing so while standing in the doorway of McDonald's and blocking other people, it has nothing to do with this situation. If you see someone standing in the doorway at McDonald's with the person's arms out keeping you from getting in, feel free to make a citizen's arrest. You are trying to add 2+2 and make it come out to 6.732 squared.

Trying to open a door is not taking the law into your own hands. Trying to make an arrest would be. In this case, he could have made a lawful arrest on the spot just as if he was a police officer because that chapter of the law is specifically allowed for citizen's arrest.

Sure it is retaliation. The problem is that there is no legal retaliation.

​I thought the UIL did find it in violation but gave a warning.

The perpetual victim.

People can hold anyone to any standard they see fit. Opinions and legalities are two completely different issues. And I started to respond to AAW and his statement that the media is using the athlete to make the story seem more important. I started to say, "you mean like they do with the cops?".

​The sheriff might be somewhat culpable. I have no clue what their procedures are or where it has been determined that someone did not follow procedures. If so then get it out in the open. You mention an argument that almost always comes up. It is not against the law to argue/smoke/be disrespectful/etc. That has to be the biggest grasping at straws of all the arguments. It is true that she might not have broken a law by using profanity (actually it can be against the law but the USSC has said that not if only the officer is offended) or being argumentative but I do not recall the officer arresting her for using profanity or for arguing. Had the officer said "You are under arrest for being disrespectful"... Houston we have a problem!

​Yeah, I guess we can disagree. I fail to see where "can you put the cigarette out" and "step out of your car" are out of line.