tvc184

I read the article and wondering what the violation of constitutional right was... other than them wanting money. I have not seen any constitutional article or amendments that demands that someone be prosecuted. The teens were arrested and brought before a grand jury where they were No Billed. I am pretty sure that is a grand jury's option. What constitutional right does a "possible" crime victim have to demand that someone be put in jail even if the evidence is not sufficient? The DA wasn't accused of the crime, the school district wasn't accused of the crime and it did not happen on their campus nor at a school function. While the accusation of sexual assault is very serious, what constitutional demands were violated on behalf of the victim by lack of evidence?

I know, Breiner was white and the prostitute was Asian. Had Breiner been Asian and the prostitute was white, then Breiner would have gone to jail and the white prostitute would have been released.

Think about what? I didn't say that they could use drugs or do I condone it. Any officers that I know that have used any substances illegally are now former officers. Possess it, sell it, buy it (in the line of duty) but don't use it.

........ and good finish for Vidor.

If a police officer gets influenza, is it the Pig Flu?

Yes, there are former officers that have or have had problems. That is why they are former officers. I have known officers to lose their careers over substance abuse but never with crack.

A chance to keep stirring the pot. Keep it stirring, it makes for an interesting evening. And most of you are in denial about the truth. Question, are udercover cops allowed to take drugs on the job? Denial is an easy accusation as anyone can say it to anyone else and have the same meaning.... which means that they have no other argument of facts. I have never heard where they can take dope while on duty but they can possess it, sell it or buy it. If you have evidence of an officer taking drugs, I suggest that you turn it in to internal affairs, the DA or another agency.

Do you know who the outside arbitrator was? Was he white, black, Asian? Remember, the white police chief fired the officer white office (Oops.. forgot that little fact did we?). The police department didn't give him his job back. He won it in a hearing from an outside person.

A chance to keep stirring the pot. Keep it stirring, it makes for an interesting evening.

And get 7 months back pay.

Actually I think they would have a harder time firing him now. Once he beats them in an arbitration hearing, it will look like retaliation on their part. That is the good thing about Civil Service and a contract. The department has to be able to back up a firing in front of an outside arbitrator. They can fire him again if they wish but they lost this bid to get rid of him for what appears to be a pretty severe accusation. If they can't fire him for having sex with a prostitute, what will it take to uphold it in front of an arbitrator? Now if he starts routinely showing up for work late, gets a lot of complaints for physical abuse, fails to turn in paperwork in a timely manner, etc., then he will make it easy on them and he will lose the next round. All that he has to do is show up and keep his nose clean and he will be almost untouchable.

Where at? I know there are some packs of hogs around the Mid-County area. One group of them is living not too far from downtown Port Neches.

Too long ago to remember winning weights. I remember that it wasn't much of a contest between first and second place.

Actually the Good Ol' Boy system did not work in his favor. Go back and try reading it this time. The chief fired the officer. How much of a Good Ol' Boy system is that? An outside arbitrator was called in on appeal and heard the testimony of the incident. When it was discovered that his superior officers know of the sting and approved it, he was reinstated by the outside arbitrator, not the Good Ol' Boy chief. To put it more bluntly, the officer got his day in court and won.

I did not dismiss her death at all. It was obviously tragic that she died and then did so delivering a child that will grow up without a mother. That is horrible from any cause. What that has to do with high school baseball, I don't have a clue. We average 100 deaths a day, 365 days a year from the flu virus. In the two weeks since the swine flu scare has happened in this country, we have probably lost over 1,000 people due to the normal seasonal flu. Let's see, one death compared to 1,000. Yep, I can understand closing schools and cancelling games. Maybe we should end all public events from now on due to that fact. After all, one life may be saved by it. : : :

I'm bringing my flyrods to make it more sporting. The last time I fished a bass tournament with a flyrod, my partner and I did it at Six Mile on Toledo Bend. There were about 12 boats or so in the contest and a few of them chuckled as we left the ramp that morning. When we won the tournament, they weren't laughing quite as hard. ;D

Did she catch the swine flu at a UIL competition? I must have missed that part. Yes it was overhyped and now the UIL has seen their folly and backed off. Go figure. If your objective is to save one person, then we can stop all high school football since every year students die playing it. Every year a couple of children are killed playing Little League baseball so let's stop that also. Let's change all speed limits to 30mph. It will take us twice the time to make long trips but it will save thousands of lives wouldn't it? Sorry but the "single life" theory doesn't work and it was way overhyped.

I suppose that Hitler did okay because he was good at what he did. Being good at what you do hardly qualfies someone as being honorable or noble in your pursuits. I never saw MLK make false accusations in order to grab headlines. I have witnessed it from QX. I guess that makes him good at what he does and that is to stir up trouble in the name of racial hatred. While discussing racial issues may lead to better world, I don't see how his making outright and easily proven lies and then threats to tear up a white town helps the black community. Maybe someone with more intellect can explain that to me. What he does is to stir up anger in other communities that may have otherwise been sympathetic to some of his causes. But that is what he wants, not understanding but controversy.

It's as fast as the can read.

Wow.. you mean that it wasn't as bad as the media hype? Hard to believe.......... : :

I have seen studies that 90% 2.5 years old OR LESS with a majority being 1.5 years old. Antler restrictions should not even have to have been put into place. The problem is that it was needed. It is not a catch all answer and there are limitations to it. The counties where it has been put into place have shown that it is way better than no anter restrictions. You are totally correct about aging deer. The only problem with that solution is that it is hard to legislate intelligence. I saw a guy at a south Texas bowhunting only day lease kill a whitetail that had about a 10" rack and weighed about 110 pounds. He swore that it was a 3.5 year old deer which was the lease rules for killing without a penalty. Not sure how he mistook a 1.5 year old buck with a 3.5 year old deer but he did. Obviously horns aren't the only indicator of age but at least it is something that can be easily visible when you compare the horns to the ears. While the restrictions are far from perfect, they are better than letting people continue to kill year and a half old deer.

Then why not just say that? No one would argue that "we are watching". So is the rest of the community. He didn't say that they are watching, he made outright accusations of criminal wrongdoing (murder, official oppression, etc) by the officers with absolutely no evidence. Had the same accusations been directed toward him then he would be wanting to sue for defamation. I think that the officers involved should do just that when it comes back from all of the investigations that there was no criminal action by the officers. QX would have a hard time denying that he slandered the officers when he got what he wanted, his face on tv spitting out his diatribe with no evidence.

It doesn't matter anyway what the offenses look like. It matter how you execute the offense that you have installed. The fanciest offense in the world is no good if you can't execute it.

There are only two people per boat. Tournaments are fished with a two man team. You can fish with a one man team but he/she will be competing with the others with two. To have three or more per boat is unfair as far as tournaments go because you are having 50% (or more) lures in the water for that team. It would be like one baseball team having 6 players on the field and the other having 9 players. It should be two people maximum per boat, at least one adult and at least one member of setxsports.com.