tvc184

What is one of the funniest things that Obama has repeatedly and continues to say is (I just saw it again today), "I don't want to rush to judge". WHAT? Anytime he can get involved in a local police officer's actions he rushes to judgment and almost invariably is wrong.

He isn't called the Divider In Chief for nothing. What may be the most disgusting by Obama is the memorial service for the officers gunned down in Dallas. He was supposed to be speaking in honor of police officers that gave their lives in the line of duty but he chose it as an occasion to talk about slavery and Jim Crow laws. What does slavery that ended more than 150 years ago got to do with officers being killed defending people? Nothing but no chance to divide shall be passed.

And locally I have not heard an APB in over 30 years although it might still be in use. In this area we usually use ATL-Attempt To Locate or regionally I have seen BOLO-Be On Lookout. Some police language is generally universal in this country but some tends to be regional. An example might be like the term "skel" or "skell". In the northeast the police use (or at least used to) use the term to describe the homeless or vagrants on the street. If you say that to an officer in the south he will likely have no clue what you are talking about. Universal language is usually in the form of dispositions after a call is made like see report/see investigation, gone on arrival (GOA), unable to locate (UTL), subject/person located, see accident report, etc. The 10 codes, numbered codes, signals, alerts, etc., can be way different. An example is that locally 10-1 means that your radio transmission is broken up and I can't understand you. 10-2 means loud and clear. In Norfolk, VA 10-1 and 10-2 means officer needs assistance which is the ultimate call for help. A call for assistance is like I am in deep such as a shootout, a bad fight, etc. In this area 10-2 simply means I can now here you clearly. Locally we use the word "Code" such as Code 1, 2 and so on. Other areas use "Signal" also in addition to 10 codes, and codes. I know in Florida Signal 0 used to mean (and maybe still does) officer needs assistance. Say that around here and an officer will likely reply, "You want me to signal what?". Clear as mud?

Stopping a described suspect is not profiling in any sense of the law. To be a lawful stop however, there has to be a limited time frame and distance from the crime scene and that is in any case, not just racial profiling. The more general the description, the less reason to justify a detention. If it is a city the size of Beaumont and there is an armed robbery at 3:00AM and a description given, even a general description, and a look alike is found 10 blocks away 15 minutes after the robbery, it will likely be viewed as a reasonable detention. If it was a tall thin black male with a white t-shirt on three days ago and you see someone fitting that description, it will likely not be viewed as a lawful detention. Those are kind of easy extremes to get the point across but every single police interaction between them and the public is open to question. The police can lawfully talk to you with a chance encounter/consensual contact, a detention with reasonable suspicion or with probable cause. Even if an officer walks up and says "hi" while you are on the street, if he continues to speak to you other than just passing you by it can be called into question. If an officer just walking down the street sees you and says something like, "Come here for a moment" and you stop to talk to him, that is a detention under the Fourth Amendment. When an officer does or says anything that would make a reasonable person believe that he had better stop, it is a detention even if nothing further happens.

So we have the right to an opinion but if that opinion is that someone else is wrong, it is automatically wrong? You are talking in circles. Let's see, if you believe someone is wrong but you say they are wrong then you are wrong for saying that they are wrong but the person that you are talking about is also wrong because he believes that you are wrong. Talk about a paradox. That also means that no one is ever right.

I just saw that this person was released and not a suspect.

Tell most of the protesters that Kerry is the Secretary of State and most will probably say, "Wasn't she in Django Unchained?".

The sad part is that most of the people complaining have no clue as to the founding of the country or what any of it means. Ask the same people protesting and it is likely that more than half of them cannot name the current vice president, the secretary of state or both.

Probably more than 95% of cases (both criminal and civil) settle out of court. It is many times in civil court to settle than it is to fight it. It is a business decision. If it costs and additional $5 million to win and prove you are not responsible or $1 million to settle, businesses will almost always take the cost effective ends by offering the settlement. It is called deep pockets. You sue someone with a lot of money for the hopes that any defense will be so expensive as to make an offer likely without having to prove your case.

Thoughts are that for the Democrats or left wing believers, free thought is no longer a right or sought out. Everyone must march in lockstep. All others banned. The incessant whining by left wing loons is almost unbelievable. I sometimes wonder if anyone actually believes that pure crap spit out or if it is just a political ploy to keep something in the news. It is like an entire room full of 5 year olds throwing a temper tantrum.

Surely this is for comedy relief. If anyone actually believes any of the fear mongering that is off the chain, they need to take a deep breath and come back to reality. Internment camps? Registering? Fear of going back 50 years? Next someone will claim that lunch lines separated by race are being proposed and that minorities will get 3/5th's of a vote.

I agree everyone should be vetted. You however continue to support a party that thinks open borders are okay and no one gets vetted, especially if they can get past the border even if it isn't thrown open. You don't put people in housing, you make it available. Remember we are talking about people that are not in this country and claim they are fleeing from something. Being interned is forced. I clearly said in my statement that you quoted, not internment. Your zeal to find fault for some reason makes you unable to see what is actually written. If anyone is receiving counseling it isn't because of what someone else thinks.

time?

That was brought up by the GOP when Reid did that. If you break your own rules to do it to us, you'd better hope we aren't in charge next. Oops!!

Yes, Smith is correct and you are wrong. Do you lose your right to protest if you do not vote? Obviously not. Do you have to vote? Obviously not. Then you go on with the working class and working hard and other such stuff. None of that has anything to do with what Smith said. It seems hypocritical to not vote, say you don't believe in the system and then complain about the system that you couldn't take 15 minutes out of your day to vote for. Can you? Sure you can. You have no obligation to do anything in order to use your First Amendment right of freedom of speech. If someone doesn't want to vote, more power to them. Complain away if you want but you seem like a phony if you complain about the status quo but can't take time to do anything about it. And does your vote matter? Ask the Democrats and are now the whiners in chief after they didn't think their vote was needed.

So what if a Trump supporter believes something? I seem to remember that quite a few Obama supporters that were members of BLM were chanting that the police should fry like bacon. I guess Obama condones the murder of police officers. He certainly gave moral backing to BLM after some members make their chants of frying officers. If Trump is responsible for any belief by anyone that voted for him, shouldn't Obama be held to the same standard? It makes perfect sense using the same rationale of, "A Trump supporter says.....". Internment camps for people that are in this country is stupid. Camps (not internment) for people that are looking to come in but not yet here might make sense. They want to get here with our permission. If they are overseas and in camps with tents or other adequate housing while waiting to prove their past, it seems okay to me. In fact it could be humanitarian giving them a decent place to stay before any acceptance to get into the country. As an example the Vietnamese, who were our allies in a decade of war and were fleeing after the USA backed out of an agreement to defend the country if they were attacked again by North Vietnam, were placed in camps in Guam and the Philippines to begin with. They were then transferred to "housing" in the USA before gaining true freedom and resident status. I am fairly certain that the USA owed them something after signing an agreement and then reneging. Even so, they were placed in camps and/or housed in two different countries before being released into the rest of the USA. Some of the Muslims fleeing are owed what by the USA? Everyone wants to come here so I understand their desires but what other connection is there? It is like the Vietnamese who were war allies? If so, where? The idea of "internment" seems like nonsense but being placed in camps or housing before reaching US shores does not.

Oh!! I didn't know that!! Thanks for the meaningless info. To get back to the point, Hillary had a lock on the presidency. Even the liberal pundits were making jokes (as some people on here) about not being close and a landslide for the Dems. She was such a lousy candidate that she could not win against a buffoon reality tv star with no political experience. Trump trumped everyone. He is not my choice as he is at the bottom of the 17 Republicans that ran but he won by the rules and that includes beating the practically unbeatable Hillary. In my opinion had it not been for her name and her gender and considering her background, she would have never made it out of the primary on the Democratic ticket, much less the presidency. Even a guy that was practically unelectable like Trump beat her in the final show. Therein lies my response to nappy. His criticism that is that Cruz could not beat Trump. Hmmm.... neither did the darling of the left.

.....or show it as a scam. What happens when all the fear mongers claims that we are going back 50 years of history and blah blah blah, doesn't happen?

They only missed it by about 12 minutes.

By that rationale, why couldn't Hillary Clinton compete so well against Donald Trump? Is your question about Ted Cruz an admission that Hillary Clinton was no good?

I brought some land locked people in Missouri about 60 pounds of high tech shrimp from a PA shrimp dock about 3 months ago. I ate the very best boiled shrimp that I have ever eaten made by one of those land lockers. I know that he travels to the Gulf coast a couple of times a year. I'm sure that he did not learn it up there but some of them definitely know how to cook seafood. On the other hand, I know people around this area that have absolutely no idea how to cook seafood. I am sometimes amazed when people think you're supposed to boil shrimp for 15 minutes at a rolling boil........

That would certainly be a good choice for us conservatives. He could probably sit next to Clarence Thomas and they could compare conservative notes which never waiver.

I will rise in defense of six burg. The conservatives on this site have a horrible record of violence such as complaining about riots and destruction, whining about the killing of unborn babies through abortion, worrying about violent crimes and innocent people getting killed in big cities, bellyache about illegal aliens committing continued violent crimes and simply being allowed to return, etc. You Republicans need to quit whining, bellyaching and complaining about death, destruction, abortions, murders, violent crimes and stuff like that.

Right. I have bought the same shrimp. As I said above, they thaw it before selling it. Unless the people you bought it from actually caught it themselves a day or so before (a the most), it was likely at some point frozen. There are very very few ice boats left. Those boats have to bring several tons of ice loaded just before they leave and their under decks are essentially huge Igloo ice chests. They have to pay lots of money for that ice and then back back in dock within a few days as it melts away. I am not saying that those boats do not exist but from the boats that I have seen around this area, about 98% of boats are freezer boats.

In the "for what it's worth" category, I have a couple of friends with shrimp boats. Most of my shrimp I get straight off the decks (frozen in sacks) of those boats that I am talking about. I haven't gotten shrimp off of a boat locally in...... about five days, frozen solid as usual. An interesting tidbit is that they freeze them in water. There is usually a freezer vat on deck with water with several 50 pound bags of salt in the water. It is then circulated with the heavy salt concentration so that it doesn't freeze but they get it down to 0 degrees. The shrimp are taken off the deck, put in sacks and lowered into the vat to be frozen. Then they are put below deck and most of the area under the main deck is a large freezer where they can keep several tons of frozen shrimp.