tvc184

  A standard general statement when someone doesn't have an answer. 

I am sure the officer got a description like a guy that is 5'11", 185 pounds with a blue shirt with beige jogging pants and saw a guy that was about 5'11", about 185 pounds with a blue shirt and beige jogging pants and SHOULD HAVE said, "Hey, that guy looks like a 3rd year chemistry major at Yale and can't be the guy I am looking for".... but NOOOO, he has to stop and harass the guy to find out if it is in fact the suspect.    The officer must not have had much experience. I can usually look at people and instantly tell their criminal record if any, what school they are attending if any, their date of birth, their address and any other pertinent information. There is rarely any reason for me ever to detain someone because an experienced officer at a mere glance can tell everything there is to know about someone. 

  That is some of the best food ever conjured up by mankind.    Where else can you get unidentified meat, a nondescript barbecue sauce and black pepper and onions into such a delicacy? 

Maybe the awful food had a lot to do with the awful finances.    Except for the McRib...............

  It probably did not really happen and was photoshopped to throw up a smoke screen. 

  Also note, if Texas carried the nation away from the recession (which is very likely) but with Texas now facing layoffs due to the low oil prices, if they then lose all those jobs, will it put the nation right back into a deeper recession and higher unemployment?  Since Obama is claiming victory (which would not exist without Texas) for the US economy spurred by the Texas boom, will he then claim the coming attraction if the Texas economy fails? 

  I guess that was why bg was laughing so hard.... "Oh yeah, the oil boom".   Imagine that for Texas. Who'd have thunk it............. 

  Bullets is exactly right. I guess you missed this so I will post it again. This civil rights activist had your opinion until a couple of weeks ago.    [Hidden Content]

If you fit a description then you fit a description. I can't tell you how many people that I have stopped that fit the description of a crime that just occurred and some of them at gunpoint.

1. Zimmerman has nothing to do with a police who has a lawful duty and authority to detain with force if necessary. 2. Martin was killed when he attacked Zimmerman, negating any need for assumtions being an issue. 3. Officer Wison was attacked by a person bigger than him who had already tried to take the officer's gun away.

It is complete nonsense. I spent 10 years on SWAT and have train with Army Rangers, Navy SEALS and Coast Guard law enforcement and have never heard disabling shots as a firearms use of force option. There are times when you do not shoot center mass or head shots and that is only when you cannot see the more vital targets. In other words if s guy is behind a brick wall and only exposes his leg, then you try to take that out and make him fall. Watch the North Hollywood shootout with LAPD SWAT at the end. The suspect was behind a vehicle so the officers bounced rounds off of the ground under the vehicle and took out his feet because that was the only target. Well he fell they then killed him. Disabling is possible with a sniper rifle under very limited circumstances but not for handgun ranges such as patrolmen face.

  Yes, they are obviously two different things and they involve two different branches of government.    That does not however take into account that his coattails brought in a Democratic super majority into power in 2008 or in other words a majority in both houses that the Republicans could not stop. The response of Obama and the Dems was to blow two years on a very unpopular health car program and leave all other promises aside. The backlash in two subsequent elections led that super majority to be turned into an all time Republican lead in the House.    Obama lost 4 million votes in 2012 from his 2008 win. He is the first president to win reelection by losing votes since the fourth term of FDR in 1944.    If Obama's claim to fame is "I won" and his legacy is taking complete control over Congress and losing both houses, so be it.    As far as Hillary, the Dems better hope that she runs because their only chance of winning is her and that is just a chance at best.    If you want to look back at history, in late December 2007 Hillary was ahead in the national polls with 42%, Obama with little more than half at 23% and John Edwards with 16%. It is easy to be ahead in the poll right now when you have no opponent. 

..... as the claimed dead party sinks the Dems hopes and effectively puts a halt to any legal Obama agenda.

Your question has a false assumption and/or a straw man argument. The rich have always gotten richer and it is because of the free market, not Obama. The flaw/straw man argument is too easy to dispell. You say that we claim Obama is a socialist that wants to take from the rich and give to the poor. Well that is exactly what has and wants to do. The Republicans compromised with the Dems in 2013 and raised the top rate by almost 5%. Now he has come back and asked for yet another tax increase on the rich. They is no claim or accusation that Obama is taking from the rich and giving to the poor, it is a fact.

..... and in doing so led the Democrats from a super manority lead to an all time historical Republican majority in the House and close to that in the Senate. BOOM!!

No, you use self defense based on actions and reasonable beliefs.

What happened to shooting in the leg or arm is that it never existed except in movies.

From the article..... "I think they don't care about human life. I think they are a curse upon the American landscape".      I wonder how many of the thousands of people convicted every year for murder are members of the NRA. 

Hmmm....... I was just paying on my lifetime membership today.

How many months did it take the premier law enforcement agency in our country (FBI) to determine that there were no criminal charges to be brought when it took the local police about one week? I know, the same reason the DA had to wait a few months to announce the verdict. Politics.

Most people every so often have to pull their heads out of the sand to breath and on occasion they get to look around and see what is happening around them.   Of course there are those that will continue to hold their breath and keep their heads buried...............

Looking at other political assassinations of that time period, I think that he was aware of his own fate yet it did not deter him. Some think it may have been prophetic when in his last speech (the day before he was killed) he stated, "I may not get there with you" and followed it up with "I'm not fearing any man!".    His idea of civil disobedience was the correct way to protest and he and others of his ilk fought for civil rights in the courts and in the court of public opinion.    I have read a few of his speeches and sermons from a book a few years ago and there is a lot more there than the often recited I Have A Dream speech. In one such sermon he stated, "Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."     Such perception could be used today. 

It usually takes so long because of defense challenges. The state will get a court date but then the defense will find a reason to postpone it and have to get another date. It is not because the state is not ready to go forward.

Biden should have just gotten his double barrel shotgun and fired it in the air like he suggested that everyone else do. No need for more powerful weapons or the Secret Service.      ......... or maybe that is what he was doing. 

Going to protest an opinion?   Ooookay............