bullets13

Crosby making it interesting all of a sudden

If LH can pick up a few first downs here and there then Crosby is going to run out of time

Crosby offense has been stagnant. Playing like it’s their first scrimmage of the season

United wins 69-58 per the announcer (TL scoreboard read 68-58). United up well over 20 in the fourth but king caught back up some in garbage time, including an uncontested 3 at the buzzer

HJ falls 70-63. Fell apart in the 4th. LP made about 8 straight FTs to ice it

As best I can tell HJ is up 52-48 after 3 over La Porte

HJ beat vidor 80-49 earlier

United turned it on at the end. Haven’t looked real sharp tonight

Made a topic at the same time you did. King finished the 1st on 10-0 run.

they both worry me, as well as several different groups in between.

I did. That's why i highlighted the statement you made "I can't imagine taking their license simply on age", and said "nope" (meaning i agree), but that I do think it should be based on performance (also agreed). then i provided an example of a very sharp person who i was very close to who had more than their fair share of faculties for their advanced age who still had no business driving.

Only explanation that I've heard that would make much sense.

too old to get that high. maybe back when i was experimenting in college.

nah, this award was hands down peevey's with or without the playoffs. The bears went 1-7 last year. they were 8-2 at the time this award was decided this year. Results from the playoffs only make it more obvious.

nope, but on performance for sure. My step-grandmother was 86 years old. Still burned all her own trash, cut down trees, pressure washed the siding of her house, etc. etc. She was as sharp as a tack. She also pulled out in front of a van with 7 people in it and was killed instantly when she didn't think to look in both directions pulling out to check her mail. Thankfully nobody died in the van, but several were badly hurt. This woman was smarter and sharper than a lot of posters in this forum, but age had still greatly dulled her decision making (like the time we found her on the very top step of a 6-ft ladder cutting tree branches), and reflexes. So if your hypothetical 80-year-old doesn't have anyone looking in on them, BUT also doesn't have all of their abilities from younger years, then what? Let them drive anyway rather than "putting a gun to their head?" I've known several 80+ year old drivers, and i've only known one who drove as well as when they were younger.

If she’s been in jail for the past three years, that could very well explain the probation at this point.

I'm all for discriminating against age in this situation. I'm also all for requiring senior citizens to pass periodic driving tests to prove they're still capable. I just use that example because politics and driving are both situations where you have a minimum age requirement (for good and obvious reasons), but could use an age maximum for the exact same reasons.

Followed the stars pretty heavy for awhile, especially in college, when one of my roommates was a huge fan. Got to watch them win that championship when I was interested. I don't really keep up now. My future brother-in-law was a big fan, but now he's my ex-future brother-in-law, so I probably won't be catching any games with him.

it's a weird situation. I see a major difference between someone who gets distracted pushing a button on the radio vs. someone who chooses to do their makeup. I see a major difference between someone who kills someone driving while doing their makeup vs. someone who is driving drunk or high. It's tough. At what point is an accident just an accident, and at what point is it negligence? Racial undertones aside, did this girl really do something that made her deserve prison time? Or was it just a tragic accident? I honestly don't know, and would be very interested to hear some of the evidence presented at court.

There was some weird stuff going on with the charges in this one. Originally charged with intoxication manslaughter, those charges were dropped and changed to manslaughter, which holds the same penalty. I'm curious why the charges were dropped, and what evidence was used to file those charges to begin with.

Thoughts? Pretty obvious there was some distracted driving going on here, but the question is to what extent. It was claimed in court that she wasn't impaired and wasn't on her phone. I've heard there was some possible evidence she may have been doing her makeup while driving, while she claimed she was blinded by the sun, which I've heard could be possible where the accident occurred.

Orange woman guilty of manslaughter in death of sanitation worker | 12newsnow.com

It's always funny to me how comfortable these sovereign citizens are with benefitting from govt infrastructure. "you can't check my license that I don't have to have to ride down these roads that the taxes I don't have to pay built."

Not sure they’re salty enough. Not sure waskom advances, either.

1. North Shore 2. College Station 3. Liberty Hill 4. Shiner 5. Duncanville 6. Denton Guyer 7. Austin Westlake 8. Katy Paetow 9. South Oak Cliff 10. Stephenville 11. Austin LBJ 12. Celina 13. China Springs 14. Brock 15. Lorena 16. Gunter 17. Franklin 18. Marlin 19. Albany 20. Mart