tvc184

[quote name="westend1" post="1128317" timestamp="1322069031"] So,  how old is this buck? [Hidden Content] [/quote] Yearling.

[quote name="palincoln4life" post="1125427" timestamp="1321807614"] No "Trap Games" in the playoffs!!!1 [/quote] As stated from a Brenham fan?

It's okay. I am about to combine all 52 threads into 1. 8) GO PIRATES!!

Drop to kneeling and take him out.

I would check Walmart for 100 round boxes of whitebox ammo.

[quote name="Ty Cobb" post="1122197" timestamp="1321651812"] Thanks for the info guys.  What is the best ammo to shoot that isn't too expensive? [/quote] UMC by Remington, American Eagle by Federal or Winchester "whitebox". The Winchester doesn't have a catchy name for its practice ammo like UMC or American Eagle but is an all white box, hence the name it is called in shooting circles, Winchester White Box.

[quote name="Ty Cobb" post="1122160" timestamp="1321649961"] [quote author=tvc184 link=topic=91779.msg1122121#msg1122121 date=1321648146] [quote author=Ty Cobb link=topic=91779.msg1122041#msg1122041 date=1321644227] I'm not a huge gun guy so I don't know the in's and out's.  I just enjoy firing off a few rounds when I get the chance.  I bought it in 2001 so I'm assuming that it would be considered fairly modern. [/quote] The M&P came out in 2005 so it isn't one of them. Is it a polymer/plastic frame like a Glock or an all metal gun? Any of them should be feeding most ammo okay but the polymer Sigma is not the most reliable thing on the market. Do you know what kind of ammo you used? If it didn't feed into a Beretta correctly then it is probably just the ammo. [/quote] My gun has a plastic frame.  I can't remember the exact name of the ammo.  Monarch, i think.  I went through mine pretty quickly so my uncle let me shoot some of his.  I had never heard of the name brand before.  He told me they were just a cheap shell.  Hopefully the problem is in the shells not the gun. [/quote] That sounds like the S&W Sigma which isn't their best pistol on the market but should still work okay. Monarch ammo is generally considered as trash. I think it is made in Russia or Serbia. There are problems at times with some of their loads being squibs or underpowered. That doesn't blow the slide back far enough to eject the spent casing or far enough back to pick up the new round from the magazine. In some pistols and some of their rifle ammo it works okay though and is generally some of the cheapest ammo on the market. I would not want my life to depend on it but if it feeds good enough to practice I might shoot some. Usually it is plenty dirty though and makes for a bigger cleanup job. If I had a malfunction or two a box it might be okay. It is was hanging up every magazine then I wouldn't shoot it.

But isn't he guaranteed to win?

[quote name="TexasMinuteman" post="1122127" timestamp="1321648427"] I hunt the Mertz 09 out in Central West Texas.We went out there last weekend and didnt see to much of anything.The deer didnt come to the feeders or the watering holes.There were no deer on the game cams.Its like they disappeared. Ive been going out there for 13 years and never seen it this bad. [size=10pt][b] I need some smoked deer sausage!!![/b][/size] :-[ [/quote] I just put 70 pounds in the freezer and 10 more pounds of pan sausage. ..... and about 40 pounds of ground meat, 30 pounds of steaks/cutlets...........

I've never been a fan of Ruger pistols and they generally have no following in the police market at all. I think they have completely stopped making the P series pistols. They really made a dent with the little LCP and LC9 pocket pistols though and almost changed the market with the rest of the industry coming out with LCP clones. They have recently come out with the new SR series which is basically a Glock clone or striker fire type pistol. I have never fired one but they look like a very nice gun and might be a player in the market. With the slightly smaller handle they might actually get some traction among strike fired pistol market (since striker fire and similar pistols are the current and future of handguns). 

[quote name="Ty Cobb" post="1122041" timestamp="1321644227"] I'm not a huge gun guy so I don't know the in's and out's.  I just enjoy firing off a few rounds when I get the chance.  I bought it in 2001 so I'm assuming that it would be considered fairly modern. [/quote] The M&P came out in 2005 so it isn't one of them. Is it a polymer/plastic frame like a Glock or an all metal gun? Any of them should be feeding most ammo okay but the polymer Sigma is not the most reliable thing on the market. Do you know what kind of ammo you used? If it didn't feed into a Beretta correctly then it is probably just the ammo.

[quote name="Ty Cobb" post="1121941" timestamp="1321637050"] Does the type (brand) of shells matter to how well a hand gun performs?  I have a Smith & Wesson 9mm that keeps jamming when I shoot cheaper shells.  I clean my pistol on a regular basis so I don't think this has anything to do with it.  I started thinking my gun sucked but I saw a Berreta 9mm do the same thing with the same shells.  Any information will be helpful and appreciated. [/quote] Yes, it matters for some guns. Some guns will eat anything you feed it and others will run premium brands and some are even more selective. Some ammo is just plain crap. We have shot some cheap stuff while qualifying with our pistols and had a significant number of different brands of pistols malfunction. Normally the good brands though will feed but some of the really cheap (usually foreign) stuff is just nasty. What kind of S&W do you have? If it is a more modern one like an M&P then it shouldn't be having misfeeds except with some really crappy ammo.

This topic has been moved to [url=[Hidden Content] Football[/url]. [iurl][Hidden Content]]

[quote name="AirForceDad" post="1120660" timestamp="1321496455"] [quote author=tvc184 link=topic=91617.msg1119235#msg1119235 date=1321398314] [size=10pt][b]In 2000 in a 6-3 vote the US Supreme Court in Santa Fe (TX) Independent School District v. Jane Doe [/b][/size]ruled that a policy "allowing" student led prayer over the PA system violates the Constitution. [/quote] [size=10pt][b]The current make up of the court would probaly dissagree with the 2000 court.[/b][/size] [/quote] I don't know. It was a 6-3 vote so you would need to swing two votes. The majority vote in 2000 was Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer. The dissent was Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas. Of the dissent, Thomas and Scalia are still there and Roberts replaced Rehnquist so no change in those votes. O'Connor was replaced by Alito so that is likely a changed vote in favor of the dissent. Still on the court from the 2000 ruling are Kennedy, Ginsburg and Breyer. That is three votes. Of the ones that retired, Stevens was replaced by Kagan so no change and Souter was replaced by Sotomayor so no change there either. That leaves it at a 5-4 instead of a 6-3 vote but with the same outcome but a closer margin.

[quote name="invictus" post="1121113" timestamp="1321556549"] [quote author=tvc184 link=topic=91398.msg1121109#msg1121109 date=1321556411] [quote author=invictus link=topic=91398.msg1121100#msg1121100 date=1321555765] I don't get all of the love for Hamburger Depot.  It's ok, but it isn't great.  Not something I'd drive for or anything.  Fuddrucker's is just as good, if not better. [/quote] Because it is just a basic truly home style cooked burger. The meat is hand made and not pressed like all fast food burgers including my favorite fast food Whataburger. The meat then takes on the kind of charred around the edges of a skillet cooked burger and not a flat pressed one on a stainless steel grill. It is then a basic choice of lettuce, pickles, tomatoes, onions and mayo or mustard for condiments. It is comfort food. It isn't a buffalo meat burger or one stacked with sauteed mushrooms and onions and Swiss cheese on top. [/quote] But, I can make that at home and then it will actually have flavor and it'll be a fraction of the cost. [/quote] You can make everything at home at a fraction of the cost. I can grill a steak at home a lot better than what I can get locally and feed the whole family for what it cost me for one dinner out and I can cook 6 shrimp at home a lot cheaper than $20. But we pay for convenience and time. We don't eat out because it is a good deal or always better food.

[quote name="invictus" post="1121100" timestamp="1321555765"] I don't get all of the love for Hamburger Depot.  It's ok, but it isn't great.  Not something I'd drive for or anything.  Fuddrucker's is just as good, if not better. [/quote] Because it is just a basic truly home style cooked burger. The meat is hand made and not pressed like all fast food burgers including my favorite fast food Whataburger. The meat then takes on the kind of charred around the edges of a skillet cooked burger and not a flat pressed one on a stainless steel grill. It is then a basic choice of lettuce, pickles, tomatoes, onions and mayo or mustard for condiments. It is comfort food. It isn't a buffalo meat burger or one stacked with sauteed mushrooms and onions and Swiss cheese on top. 

Out of curiosity, who decides things like 5:35PM? Why not just 5:30PM? Heck, why not have it at 5:38PM and 15 seconds? [IMG][Hidden Content]]

[quote name="texas2step4u" post="1120480" timestamp="1321482943"] I seem to recall an NFL game that had a Muslim prayer over the loud speaker after 9-11.  So it does happen, .............  I do know this without any doubt......as long as their are tests in school, there will be prayer in school.  [/quote] The NFL or the networks are not public schools funded by taxpayer's money. They can do as they wish. There simply is no comparison. And again, you can pray in school all you want and even proclaim it. It just can't be legally school directed.

[quote name="vp32" post="1120186" timestamp="1321468618"] Whats the freaking difference? Saying it over a PA system. Saying in a loud speaker. Saying it to yourself.  I'm missing the difference here. [/quote] It is like you praying in a classroom. You can do so all you want. What if your math teacher while in class breaks out in a prayer from the Book of Wisdom from the Catholic Bible that is not recognized in the Protestant religions? No big deal if you are a Baptist? What if that teacher is Muslim and breaks out in a verse from the Qur'an? No difference? There is a big difference between you prayer with yourself and hearing it from a government entity.  What is the difference? It is the law as ruled by several courts including the highest court in the land. You might not like the seat belt or speeding laws either but that doesn't stop a person from paying citations from them. Everyone likes the Good Ol' Boy system as long as he is the Good Ol' Boy. Let someone else take that place and the system isn't so good anymore. Be careful what you wish for on majority rules, which isn't what the Constitution was founded on. What about the many school districts that are a majority Spanish in Texas? Should teachers be allowed to pray in classrooms from the Catholic Bible and in Spanish? After all, majority rules and they are Christians.

[quote name="AggiesAreWe" post="1120254" timestamp="1321471162"] A person can be deemed "intoxicated" with a less than .08 blood/alcohol. Trust me, I KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE!! ;) (no driving was involved) [/quote] I rest my case.  8)

[quote name="Coach Comeaux" post="1120247" timestamp="1321470800"] I think what TVC is trying to say is that no matter what your BAC is .... if it is over .001 you are considered intoxicated.... the .08 is only a reference point to which has been set for judgment impairment.... if you drink 1 beer, 1 shot or a glass of wine... after your first drink you are considered to be intoxicated.... Please TVC if I am wrong correct me on this.... but this is what I am getting from what you are trying to say.... [/quote] Pretty close. Some level of impairment is intoxicated Texas law. It can be mental or physical. A 0.069 is not a single beer or glass of wine. I think that it is somewhat irresponsible for people to draw the conclusion that he did not have enough alcohol in his system to be "intoxicated" so he therefore must have been the victim of foul play. Maybe he was and maybe he wasn't. Hopefully the family isn't reading all of these speculations and not on this forum but the half dozen others that are out there. No matter to anyone's guess as to how intoxicated he was, or anyone's experience or guessing, it is clear that he is a minor and yet was out drinking and a good bit more than a single drink. To dismiss that as a potential problem or possible cause of this tragic death is not helping anything. I hope that no one close to the family is looking at media headlines and telling them that it must be foul play based on media misreporting.

[quote name="vp32" post="1120221" timestamp="1321469764"] The definition of intoxication according to the law [/quote] Got to love generic legalese that does not apply. Since people are so fixated with 0.08 as the per se limit and to believing that you are not intoxicated prior to that, this is the Texas definition of intoxication. [b] Texas Penal Code Chapter 49 40.01 (2) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into the body;[/b] There is no limit and all that has to be shown is not having normal mental faculties. So if a person would do something while he is drinking that he would not do while is stone cold sober, he is then intoxicated or in short, impaired judgment only. The 0.08 per se limit means that there is not even any arguing at that point as the state has deemed you intoxicated. Anything under than down to 0.01 can be intoxicated according to your actions or judgment. He was right at 0.07. Again, to dismiss his level of intoxication as somehow showing proof that there was foul play is a folly and somewhat destructive.

I have read this thread and others on FaceBook and other forums and people see the news media term of "under the limit" and almost automatically determine on their own that it has to be foul play because he was "not intoxicated". That simply isn't true. And does anyone know what his alcohol concentration was when he got on the tracks? Just because it was at that level at the time of death, what was it earlier? It has been brought up that with my almost three decades of dealing with such issues and criminal investigations is speculation yet someone with absolutely no experience in that area can look at a lab report and make a determination. As I stated, he could have lay there himself to go to sleep, he could have committed suicide, he could have fallen and had an accident or someone could have assaulted him and put him there. Unless there is a witness of the events, it is all speculation.

[quote name="akifan94" post="1120199" timestamp="1321468964"] It is reaching. You have no knowledge of this situation personally and are guessing based on your percieved experience. Hopefully you do not work for the JCSD because then I will know you are reaching. I have seen their work first hand. [/quote] Perceived experience? I wonder if you call a doctor, an operator at a chemical plant, a dentist or a brick layer with 28 years in the business as having perceived experience. If you go back to my first post in this thread you will see that have not guessed at anything except to tell you that someone with a 0.69 alcohol concentration is intoxicated. I never said slobbering falling down drunk and I never said it had anything to do with his death. Quite to the contrary, I stated that without witnesses, people would be speculating as to the cause. That is hardly drawing any conclusions from direct knowledge of the case.

[quote name="PN-G bamakid" post="1120192" timestamp="1321468747"] [quote author=tvc184 link=topic=91706.msg1120182#msg1120182 date=1321468513] [quote author=vp32 link=topic=91706.msg1120176#msg1120176 date=1321468297] [quote author=tvc184 link=topic=91706.msg1120174#msg1120174 date=1321467962] He was intoxicated. [/quote] Not to the legal limit so therefore there is no reason to think that his intoxication was a factor in his death. [/quote] There is no such thing as "legal limit" unless you are driving and even then it can be lower. That is a news media term and has no bearing on the law other than DWI and then it is the per se limit. I can assure you that if he was at that level, he was intoxicated. In fact people that are not used to drinking can be intoxicated as a much lower level. [/quote] tvc, in your opinion, is that enough for him to pass out on his way home? [/quote] No. I think at such a level he might be unsteady on his feet and have poor judgment. It is enough to make you drowsy according to your level of tolerance.