Search the Community

How's Nederland feel about not making the playoffs this year? How's PNG feel about playing Marshall in first round =-P BH sucks, coming for our district title.

Typical small town politics you, would rather hire the coach with one year of being an assistant coach than someone who has multiple years, Weather it was a grad assistant or not. Now all of a sudden people are blaming the school for Girola leaving, but when he was at buna all people did was talk crap about him because he wasn’t living to to y’all’s expectations. And I know for a fact that the SUP doesn’t know his dad but I guess because she’s black they have to know each other. It’s sad that all just because buna has a black SUP she HAD to have something to do with hiring one of the few if not the only black coach that’s not from buna but go ahead continue to show y’all’s true colors if Donny lee was still there would his decision have been questioned?

None of that is the point here.. If a coach had a 6-51 career record and applied for the boys job, does he even get an interview? I'm certain in saying no, he wouldn't. If you're going to talk about a coach with limited experience, KJ has 2 years coaching the girls at Chilton, where his stepfather is the Sup. That's limited experience as well with none of that experience being successful. Connell has 1 year under his belt coaching these girls already. He's been around and helping them out while also being on the bench for the boys games. Yes, if things don't work out Buna can simply move on, but Connell will have almost certainly moved on by then. Why would he come back to a place that didn't hire him, but instead hired a coach who Buna knows nothing about with the exception of him being unsuccessful at his last coaching job?

And what if he was a Martian arriving in a spaceship? Its getting ridiculous now. Keep in mind you need to direct this question elsewhere. I did not voice the "straw man" argument out of desperation. Someone else did. Talk to him.

Ah, the straw man argument. UPS would not be packing heat, and then blow me away standing in my own home. You want to talk law? Earlier you said Whose property it is on has no bearing" Really? Better look up "Castle Doctrine" and "Stand Your Ground" laws. Whose property it is absolutely, positively does matter. I would say you need to consult a good lawyer and be enlightened.

Someone knocked on his door, and instead of just answering it (or not), according to you he was "terrified, and protecting his family." And MY post sounds like "lawyer talk?" But really, there's nothing more terrifying than someone knocking on your door at 11:30. Any reasonable person would throw the door open and jump out with a gun, aiming at whoever is out there with no clue as to who it is.

The homeowner was terrified, and protecting his family. He did NOT shoot the cops. THEY made the mistake, THEY were the agressors, THEY killed him, on his property. It all sounds like laywer talk, shift blame to the dead guy. Put him on trial, after all, he can't speak for himself anymore, can he?

If that is what people want for their neighborhood, okay. Don’t talk, don’t cooperate. But then the complaints come out that it is someone else’s fault. The city, the police, the mayor or whoever, won’t protect the community. The answer, a simple, no, you won’t protect yourselves. The city can offer the manpower and the county can prosecute but only if a witness steps forward or someone drops a dime on an anonymous phone call. When I was in community policing as an assignment, I would tell every one of the more than a dozen community groups in our city, your neighborhood can absolutely be as peaceful as you want it. The problem is you have to actually want it and not just say the words, I wish I could sleep at night. The problem is not the criminals. The problem is the people living there, who are not willing to lift a finger to stop it. Most of the time that lifting of a finger is simply placing a phone call. Community policing started in Port Arthur from an informal group of Black men who started it on their own. A few friends got together and said we are tired of this crap in our small neighborhood. I think all of them were military veterans and most or maybe all had been to Vietnam. They did not ask for permission, they simply started walking as a group and confronting dope dealers hanging out. After a while they approached the police department and asked for help. The chief called for a meeting with them I and other officers volunteered to be involved. That group of men called themselves AAMAN (we pronounced it “uh-manh”)/African American Men Against Narcotics. They alone kicked off what would later have a very successful run of community policing. We applied and got a federal grant to specifically hire 9 officers to run the program of community groups. That program was later ended as I guess political climates changed with money spent elsewhere and new priorities popped up but the 3 year federally paid program lasted about 15 years and was fairly successful. The point being, a neighborhood can have as quiet of a neighborhood as they want. As Officer Malone (Sean Connery) told Eliot Ness (Kevin Costner) a couple of times in the Untouchables…. “What are you prepared to do?”. Many people aren’t prepared to do anything except complain.

I have not been to an actual meeting but I have a good feel of how many of the Republicans feel around here. None (and I mean none) wear a red hat, none get irate when you talk negative about Trump, and none will stay at home if Trump doesn't get the nomination, all that I know would not stay at home and take a chance on the idiot we have in office now being re-elected because of them. And your good Christian remark is simply ignorant, what is the alternative, vote for the party that approves men in women's bathrooms, put a stamp on the wholesale killing of the unborn, I could go on and on. It's a shame how many folks think our problem is a candidate when the same folks couldn't recite a single line from the Constitution, but the problem surely can't be with the ignorant masses. Wake up and place blame where it lies.

Have you been to a meeting of one of your local Republican groups lately? I have, and I promise you... it's all about Trump at the grassroots level. At least in this part of the world anyways. It's the reason that sensible politicians won't speak out against trump-you'll incur the wrath of the Trump loyalists, much like you do here. And if you're lucky, you can probably get Trump to assign you a nickname and talk crap about your wife. And the "good" Christians and Republicans will ignore it because... I guess they like that type of behavior.

Street code... We don't talk to police, we don't make a peace bondWe don't trust in the judicial system, we shoot gunsWe rely on the streets, we do battle in the hoodI was born in the G Code, embedded in my blood - Brad Jordan

Give it up dude.. trump had 4 years to #lockherup, and all he did was scam the taxpayers and his clueless voters and you.. thinking the accountability is coming soon?? Talk about lessons unlearned

I keep seeing Mizzou in the mix. But money does talk.

your statements are contradictory and hypocritical on this subject. You talk about “not defending the effectiveness of a vaccine that you know nothing about like a fool”, but you’ve spent 3 years and 52 pages demonizing it, and anyone supports it, supported it, or believes medical studies over your witch doctor and the “#1 cardiologist in the world” (still waiting for you to quit deflecting and defend that statement). You’ve posted no studies, but roughly 100,000 Twitter posts. All this while claiming you’re for free choice. I hope nobody reading this thread made their decision based on the nonsense YOU’VE posted. There are several studies available for you to ignore that show the death rate of unvaccinated was 14-15x higher than vaccinated people during the initial, more serious strains of COVID. You can say that’s not success because “people who got vaccines still got COVID” if you’d like. .

I knew that was coming, that’s why I posted that clip. Look at all the lies Newsweek wrote about Trump. Lol. What does any of that have to do with her success rate of treating Covid patients? My doctor basically foIlowed the same protocol and didn’t lose one Covid patient out of about 2,000 of them. I don’t care if she’s a lesbian and worships SpongeBob. If she has a flawless success rate in treating Covid patients then I am seeing her if I was dealing with Covid. An obviously she dealt a lot with these medications in Africa because of Malaria. You probably didn’t even watch the whole clip. Are you refuting her success rate with treatment Covid patients. By the way I am not trying to change your mind. This all started with you thinking you were the Chief of Truth by basically saying Reagan was posting lies. I find that to be such a hypocritical statement considering that you were cheerleading the effectiveness of the vaccine when we now know that was BS. Do you know what was in that vaccine you took? You make comments about a vaccine you truly know nothing about. You just can’t admit it. We’re not debating policy we’re talking about something that could be life altering for some individuals if taken. Hopefully no one that visited this site during that time took you serious. I am not trying to demonize anyone who took the vaccine. That’s an individuals choice but I am definitely not go to defend the effectiveness of a vaccine that I know nothing about like a fool. I have family members who took the vaccine and not one of them were dumb enough to defend the effectiveness of a vaccine they knew nothing about. They ask me what I thought and I told them it was their decision. Do you know what they told me? They said well I guess I am going to take my chances. They didn’t get on a social media forum an speak of the effectiveness of a vaccine they knew nothing about. Like I said you were wrong in speaking on something that could be life altering for some people if taken. If you want to take it then fine but I wouldn’t Champion something I knew nothing about. The more you talk about the more foolish you sound. The End

No, you just said he was the best cardiologist in the world. but then again, you think ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine are effective against covid, because your cardio messiah says so. maybe you can start making tinfoil hats with his picture on them. Study Finds No Benefit to Taking Ivermectin for COVID-19 Symptoms | Duke Health of course, your heart doctor that's making $16.99 apiece from sheep for his paperback, and however much a speaking appearance says differently. I'm quoting medical studies, and you're quoting the twitter doctor. Wait, I mean the best cardiologist in the world. Amazing that you can get caught in that nonsense lie and in the same breath talk down to anyone about how dumb they are for "drinking the koolaid." you worship this guy so much you're attributing the #1 ranking in the world to him based on literally nothing at all, and anyone who says differently is a moron. Including well over 90% of the medical community. It's all a conspiracy, and he's the one getting rich "exposing it". There's really no point in going any further with this. You post baseless accusations about me, and your proof that I'm wrong all comes from a discredited doctor who you've ordained the best cardiologist in the world (but you keep taking shots about me being an expert). And you still refuse to address where you've come up with the lie.

@Unwoke I’ll come over here and talk to you so we don’t derail the other topic. If you want to reply to my last post, do it here please. Give me some time and I’ll post where i stand on vaccines on this thread. I’m in the middle of something for a few minutes.

So, the headline reads “EPA regulations to cost billions”. The first paragraph says it “could cost billions”. Those are contradictory statements. I read the EPA guidelines and they only talk about helping communities identify and inform if higher concentrations exist. It says nothing about treatment mandates. It talks about identifying source contamination, further research into the hazards, etc. Brad Parscale is a disruptor. American Greatness is a vehicle for spreading disinformation. Ingest all the PFAS you want. Run your water through lead pipes. Above all, spread distrust about our public health services. Good American.

Here's a few thoughts and stuff I just learned. With this money coming to the Biden family from China, could this be one of the reasons JoeBama says nothing about the Fentanyl coming from China through our southern border? Could this also be why JoeBama let a balloon coming from communist china sail all away across America taking all the pics it wants? Could this also be why JoeBama doesn't really talk about where Covid originated? Food for thought. What I learned: Not only did the Biden family relieve money from China, it also received money from Russian oligarchs. Remember, JoeBama put sanctions on Russian oligarchs for the invasion of Ukraine. BUT -- there were only 2 that he "did not" sanction. And guess what: Those were the 2 that sent money to the Bidens. The salient question we have to ask ourselves: What did the Bidens do to earn this money?! We know Hunter is not capable of doing anything for/with China. But you know who is -- JoeBama!! It was clearly influence peddling! Two months after JoeBama left office as VP, 3 million dollars was sent to a bank account. Then 2 days later the money was dispersed to the Biden family. As of now we know 3 who got it. I believe there was a total of 7 who got paid. Why is Hunter, of all people, at the center of all this? For one simple reason: He was the easiest to manipulate. He was a drug addict and, well, you know the other stuff. What we have so far is only one set of bank records. It's my understanding is that there are 10 to 11 for banks involved! You know what the ironic thing is, the radical left falsely accused Trump of doing everything JoeBama is actually doing.

Get Woke, Go Broke? It’s Time To Talk About SVB’s Ties To The World Economic Forum! From the article: "Looking into SVB’s operational history, the company was a woke nightmare. Take a gander at their 66 page ESG report compiled in 2021 to get a sense of how far to the extreme political left the bank was. SVB is the pinnacle example of why “Get Woke, Go Broke” is more than a mantra, it’s a rule. Digging even deeper we then find that SVB’s leadership was highly involved in the WEF and their Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics (SCM), along with corporate governance. SVB was not only implementing every single policy the WEF outlines in its agenda, they were reporting back to the WEF on their progress. SVB’s capital exposure was heavily tied up in securities, but also venture capital for woke tech startups, climate change related projects and leftist activist groups which qualified for ESG loans; everything from BLM to Buzzfeed. In other words, they were investing aggressively into money-pit projects that devoured cash and gave nothing back. The real question is, how many US banks are involved in ESG and WEF operations at the same level as SVB? Dozens? Hundreds?" [Hidden Content]

Bumping this up since there's Duncanville talk in the BU vs LH thread.

That was one of the most questionable mistakes. I would've never got in the police car. "Pops call the lawyer and we'll meet him down there if they show back up with a warrant. And while you wait, make sure to remove yourself from my property." Might not have worked out. But at least I wouldn't be a case study. BTW. As a youth during spring break, which is this week lol, some kids in the neighborhood decided to do a lil vandalism. We thought we were smart about it. But didn't know that one of the kids was already on juvenile probation. After people stated noticing things, the law was called out. They went straight to his house. His mom let them walk right in the house. Then they started searching his room. They found other things that had nothing to do with what we were doing that weekend. So after that, they come knock on my door. My dad kick my @.. outta bed and says the police need to talk to you. Get your But outside and tell the truth. Long story short, we faced charges for the other stuff they found as well. Funny thing is that guy is still 1 of my best friends.

There is a legal doctrine of the Exclusionary Rule. That is, once the police violate a person’s rights, any evidence gained afterwards is lost. A violation of rights typically doesn’t include physical abuse but usually a mistake by an officer. Example scenarios. In both situations a guy stops to speak with an officer and is later arrested for a crime. 1. A guy is walking down the sidewalk and an offices says, “Come here a minute, I want to ask you something” 2. A guy is walking down the sidewalk and an officer says, “Do you mind if I talk to you for a minute, I want to ask you something. 1. would likely be seen as a detention requiring reasonable suspicion of a specific crime. If none exists, any evidence is thrown out. 2. would likely be seen as a voluntary encounter with consent of the person stopped. Reasonable suspicion is not likely to be an issue since the person agreed to talk with the officer after being asked if “he minded” talking with the officer. See the difference? In the first scenario the office says come here and in the second he says, do you mind talking. One is an order, the other is a question So….. What would a reasonable person believe under the same situation is what must be answered by the court (from the trial judge and potentially all the way up to the US Supreme Court). The case I described was an actual case from Harris County, Texas that made it all the way to the Supreme Court. The 17 year old was asked to come in and was told that he was not in custody but just to make sure they were doing the right thing, the officers read Miranda anyway and the 17 year old agreed to talk/confess. Even though he said, “Okay” when asked by the officers to go with them, the 17 year old, in the opinion of the Supreme Court, decided that under the circumstances he would feel that he was being arrested. Even though the officers said no he was not under arrest, the fact that they handcuffed him after suspecting him of a murder and put him in the back of the police car in handcuffs should be considered an arrest. Would a reasonable person believe that he is free to leave at that point? The Supreme Court said no, that is an arrest no matter what the officers call it The US Supreme Court in a UNANIMOUS decision said that the 17 year old should have be considered under arrest and therefore his confession not allowed into evidence. Even though the officers later, attempt to put a 17-year-old at ease and to comply with the Fourth Amendment and the Miranda rights, it was too late. Remember that in the Exclusionary Rule, once the officers make a mistake, even with the best intentions and thinking that they are doing the right thing, it doesn’t matter. All subsequent evidence is lost. Had the officers not handcuffed the kid or if they would have gotten the father to give the kid a ride to the police station, the confession likely would have been admissible as evidence. [Hidden Content]

Case: Confession in a sexual assault and murder of a 14 year old girl. Notable points: A 17 is an adult in Texas under criminal law. There is no need to get certified as an adult. A person ceases to be a child on his 17th birthday. Also, if a person consents to talking with the police (not being detained), consents to a search, consents to give a statement, etc., the police are not required to have probable cause. A person can consent to any of that. Case: A 14 year old girl had been sexually assaulted by her 19 year old half brother. Apparently this was an ongoing relationship and what used to be called statutory rape or sex with an underage child whether with consent or not. One day the half brother stabbed his sister to death, I believe after having sex with her. Maybe to keep her from reporting the assaults but I am not sure. In any case he confessed after volunteering to take a polygraph and failing. The case is not about him however. In the confession the brother implicated another person who was a 17 year old adult. The police showed up at the 17 year old’s home at 3am. The homeowner, father of the 17 year old, consented to allow officers to enter the home and speak to the 17 year old. The officers (3?) went to the bedroom and woke the 17 year old up. They said, we need to talk and the 17 year old said “okay”. These facts do not appear to be in dispute. So it’s not like the police gave one version and the 17 year old (or family) another. The police led him to the police unit since he had consented to speak with the officers by saying “okay” when asked. He was only wearing the T-shirt and boxers that he was sleeping in. The officers told him that he was not in custody but had to be handcuffed if in the back of the unit. He would have the handcuffs removed at the police station. Once arriving at the police station, the police took off the handcuffs and asked if he wished to talk. Even though he was told that he was not in custody, he was given his rights under Miranda to make sure that he was volunteering to speak with officers. It was kind of like a safeguard just to make sure he agreed to talk. After being read Miranda, the 17-year-old agreed to talk. He was confronted about the 19 year old’s confession that implicated him. Being confronted with that fact, he confessed to taking part in the crime. He did not specifically admit to taking part in the actual killing however under Texas law, if you take any part in a crime, then you to be charged with a crime. After that confession, the trial judge admitted the statement as evidence at the trial. The 17 year old was convicted and I believe given 35 years in prison. He appealed to the district appeals court, and they agreed with the trial judge, the confession was with consent. He made his final appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (supreme court for criminal law) and they simply refused to hear the case. The 17 year old then appealed to the federal system, saying that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated. So even though the police were allowed with consent to another home and to speak with a 17-year-old, asked him to go speak to the officers and he said okay, was told that he was not in custody, was put in handcuffs just for the trip but then they were removed immediately after arriving at the station, was read the Miranda warning, just to make sure he understood that he was consenting to giving a statement and after being confronted with the fact that the 19-year-old had already confessed, his lawyer claimed that his rights were violated. Good confession or a violation of rights? In the Police Academy I would ask the cadets, if you say it was a lawful confession with consent, why? If you say it was an unlawful confession, why?

An officer sees a guy standing on a corner. He is met by another man. Alternately they casually walk down the block and look around near a store front. One would walk down the block and return, they would talk and then the other would walk down the block. After a few minutes a third guy came up and did the same. He then walked away from the first two and didn’t return. The officer said that it looked like they might be casing a store to be robbed. So when the first two guys walked to meet with the third guy, the officer had seen enough and approached and then grabbed onto one of the men. He physically spun the guy around and checked him for weapons. Finding a revolver the officer ordered the other two up against the wall and found another gun. The officer did not have probable cause to believe the men might be armed or about to commit a crime but he was suspicious of their behavior by his “experience”. The armed men were convicted of the weapons violation. There was no evidence to prove if the men were about to commit a crime. Lawful?