tvc184

    Reading this from CNN...  "In this case, the 18-year-old was armed, and he fired on the officer first, St. Louis Police Chief Sam Dotson said.".....and in the same article....."The officer and one of the three tussled. The teen ran off, then turned around and fired at least three shots at the officer, Dotson said. The officer returned fire, killing the teen. Police recovered a 9 mm handgun".    I am inclined to believe that the officer was fired on. Then again, this is from CNN, a well known Tea Party outlet.    [Hidden Content]

No one has symptoms...... until they have symptoms.    While that seems ridiculously obvious, the CDC has said that you might show symptoms up to 21 days after exposure. I can only think that means that you might be symptom free at 19 days and still come down with the disease.    There is likely about a 99.8% chance that she does not have Ebola. In fact I would probably wager a fairly large sum of money that she doesn't. With that, the idea that "she can't have it" seems stupid while looking at the CDC guidelines. 

  Okay, I remember that one now about three weeks ago.   If that guy fired at an officer (or anyone for that matter) and continued to flee, I don't care if he was shot in the back. As long as he retained a weapon or possibly could have retained a weapon, I see nothing illegal about that. According to what else happened, deadly force could be lawfully used as long as he was fleeing and failed to surrender. 

Who got shot in the back of the head?

  Always a wise choice. 

    It's hard to tell hippy.    Maybe it is the same place this comes from:       Maybe we miss the day when whites could kill blacks in front of witnesses and get away with it?    When I read such comments I always wonder where they come from. I saw nothing in the thread (or any thread ever) that said such nonsense that could be even wildly construed as we longed for the days when you could murder someone without fear of retribution. Even so, apparently some of the comments were interpreted that way.    I guess under that rationale, if you said that PNG will beat Central this Saturday afternoon, I could in response reasonably say, yeah but my income taxes will go up next year and voter ID will be approved by the SCOTUS. 

Awesome weather.... but I will not be hunting this weekend.

Sorry. Didn't know I needed permission to post.   Duly noted. 

.......... and bring your AR-15?

  Leaches on the public dole.    The slug, dropout that is getting it for free or paying $10 a month thinks that is great but for the guy working for a living and it goes from $500 a month to $800 a month, not so much. 

  I listened to his comments and then read the transcript to make sure that I wasn't missing something.    Barkley never said anything about the entire race. His comments were, "The loser kids" (doesn't sound like the entire race) and when speaking directly about blacks knocking other blacks stated, "Black people who are unintelligent, who don't have, uh, success" (again doesn't sound like an entire race).     So losers and unsuccessful people are dragging blacks down in his opinion. I don't know about dragging people down but I do know that I have witnessed some of the exact comments that he is talking about. 

Holder is a divisive pot stirrer and the only difference between him and Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton/et al, is that he works for the administration.    I honestly do not think he is about truth but an agenda. All politicians (that includes people appointed by politicians) have an agenda but it should end at the point of ignoring facts or trying your best to prove a point even when the facts do not back it up. How would someone like it if I based traffic stops and police action on political affiliation?     I just watched Holder make a statement on the television about Ferguson and he said that definitely the leaks (about Officer Wilson being justified) need to stop and quit swaying public opinion (I will get back to that later). In almost the same sentence he then went on to say that he has an open investigation and there are big problems in the Ferguson PD that needs to be corrected.   Okay... the leaks need to stop and trying to sway public opinion should not be done...... unless of course, it is done in the same statement by the guy saying it. Holder says to quit trying to sway the public and in the same breath says... "But I have found serious issues at Ferguson PD".   Really? You people quit putting out statements.... but let me keep putting out mine on the exact same topic. He might as well say.... "Y'all need to quit trying to paint one of the parties (Michael Brown) in a bad light while as continue to look into the situation with an open eye but that evil FPD needs to have 'wholesale change' due to that evilness".    Again, really?   On the public opinion, what does he care what the public thinks? He seems to more than willing to allow the public to hate the PD and makes statements (including today) that supports that belief but he is unwilling to allow people to know any facts that portray the Officer Wilson as not only using lawful force but necessary force.    I know that people want to believe that he is being completely fair and unbiased but looking at his actions, it doesn't seem to bear that out. 

It is more like we need a specific change in our attorney general.

The easiest and best way to keep from being shot by a police officer is that when he points a gun at you and tells you to stop what you are doing ..................  stop what you are doing.    It is not a hard concept. 

Hmmm.....   Jefferson County Clerk Carolyn Guidry tells us that the ES&S Ivotronics voting machines used by the county have in some cases repeatedly lost calibration. Guidry says her office has received complaints that voters who tried to cast a "straight party" ballot have reviewed their selections to find that the machine has switched their votes to the other party. 

From USA Today (not exactly a Tea Party publication):   "New guidelines from the Obama administration would restrict the movement of people at high risk of Ebola................."   From Huffington Post (more like a GOP hate group:   "In his remarks, Mr. Obama defended the C.D.C. guidelines............"   And why not on all of these and others. After all, the CDC is part of HHS which is an administration cabinet level agency. In other words, the head of the HHS and CDC work directly for the president in his personally selected cabinet just as much as the Attorney General or the Secretary of Defense. 

Statistics can be played with according to how you present the argument while looking at exactly the same stats. 

  So the Obama administration is putting in rules for political purposes and it has nothing to do with sound medical practices.   I can accept that. 

Yet again the CDC has changed its Ebola stance saying that people should stay home if it high risk, even without symptoms and unknown if the virus is present in the person.    I thought they were never contagious even with a low grade fever until it passes some magical number like 103. Now with no symptoms they want people to stay home.   Therein lies the problem with their protocols and recommendations. The head agency that claims to be and is supposed to be on top of it all, is continually changing. 

Easy to love something when someone else is paying the bill.    I wonder if I can get a new car to replace my 9 year old Hyundai and have some else pay for it......... 

  I don't think most people are freaking out. They are asking for the correct procedures be put in place before there is a reason to freak out.   It is great to say that no one has died here that has caught it here. We have four hospitals in the entire country with limited space for such quarantines. What happens if it gets into the public for real? What happens if 5,000 people get it? We simply do not have beds nor the resources for $1 Million in treatment for 5,000 people and then quarantine the maybe 200,000 people they came into contact with.   I think what you claim is freak out is people asking for the government to get their act in order, ban the flights, quarantine or restrict movement of people returning, actually training the medical field and putting known protocols in place, etc. Look at almost every health professional commenting on these limited incidents and you will see almost every one of them say that the CDC guidelines are all over the map and keep changing. It sure doesn't look like they have their act together and that is what people are concerned over, not the three people that have caught it here and due to the extreme limited number, can have private care and be flown across the country on secure jets. 

  I have no problem with such a law as it pretty much fits the definitions under most criminal laws of reckless or with criminal negligence. To my knowledge no such laws exist however.    There are some laws on the books in some states I believe that say if you have a disease but I have no clue if any exist that say if you have possibly been exposed and may have it sometime in the future. 

  Does "merit" equal legal or constitutional?

  There would be a lot of disbarred attorneys then....   Maybe not a bad thing.    Actually it is a good question. If someone claims that you are exposed to a disease (any disease), what authority does the government have to force you to be locked up inside of your home for almost a month? It does not matter what you "should" do but what the law can "force" you to do. 

Assault? Sounds more like an aggravated robbery. Maybe robbery and assaults run in the family.