Jump to content

Language warning, woman arrested at HS football game


Boneyard Boys

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Boneyard Boys said:

This is a fun discussion... 🤣🤣🤣 Everyone has really strong opinions on this. Me personally, I will do whatever it takes to keep the games going and be able to watch in person. That said, if I wear my mask all the way to my seat it should be fine to remove it if I'm sitting all alone away from everyone. I'm pretty sure they aren't just going to run up on you and arrest you, there has to be more to this story that we don't see in the video. She may have been walking around without it on and I'm sure she got a warning first.

Exactly. All the above. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Reagan said:

You tell me?

This is the hidden content, please

Apples to Toyotas.

 That was a federal civil rights violation by age, sex, race, national origin or religion. It was not over a school’s authority to make rules without state permission  

No government (state, federal, county, city, school district, etc.)  can make discriminatory rules or laws.

During the debate on this subject I made the point that I believed that he would win in federal court over civil rights. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Uncle Pig said:

IF EVERYONE WOULD JUST DO WHAT COPS SAY AND NOT RESIST, WE WOULD NOT BE WHERE WE ARE IN THIS COUNTRY RIGHT NOW. PERIOD. THERE WOULD BE NO BLACK LIVES MATTER 

About 99.5% of the time we would never hear of these cases because they would not exist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Boneyard Boys said:

This is a fun discussion... 🤣🤣🤣 Everyone has really strong opinions on this. Me personally, I will do whatever it takes to keep the games going and be able to watch in person. That said, if I wear my mask all the way to my seat it should be fine to remove it if I'm sitting all alone away from everyone. I'm pretty sure they aren't just going to run up on you and arrest you, there has to be more to this story that we don't see in the video. She may have been walking around without it on and I'm sure she got a warning first.

I agree. Great topic. I have made more posts in half an hour than I usually make all week  

 On a side note,  I never knew how many lawyers and police officers were in this forum. I am impressed. 😀

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And kind of on the same topic. I have found 2 SCOTUS cases that say mandatory vaccines are legal and 2 SCOTUS cases that say quarantines are legal under the 10th Amendment on states’ rights. The states have a policing ability to protect its citizens by mandating non-voluntary actions.

I would think if you could mandate jabbing someone with a needle, you could require a mask. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SmashMouth said:

There are also some institutions that won’t engage or prosecute illegal aliens. Doesn’t make them right.  

Everyone can say what they want on this issue but when it’s all said done there will be settlements reached due to the over reach of this ridiculous mandate. Litigation over something like this will take 2 to 3 years but there will be settlements. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Realville said:

Everyone can say what they want on this issue but when it’s all said done there will be settlements reached due to the over reach of this ridiculous mandate. Litigation over something like this will take 2 to 3 years but there will be settlements. 

You may very well be right. But she still got tazed and run off the property. Didn’t have to go that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Realville said:

Everyone can say what they want on this issue but when it’s all said done there will be settlements reached due to the over reach of this ridiculous mandate. Litigation over something like this will take 2 to 3 years but there will be settlements. 

Have those suits been filed yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WOSgrad said:

Maybe even some Rule 17 judgments against some plaintiffs.

I am not that familiar as you are (not close) on state civil law.

Dirty Harry- “A man’s got to know his limitations.”

I have gotten summary judgment (not sure which USC applies) when I was involved as a defendant in federal court. The US magistrate tossed the case with prejudice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Realville said:

These are just a few but believe it hasn’t even really got started yet. It’s coming!

Both of those suits are for injunctive relief, meaning that they want to prevent the enforcement of a law.  It does not appear that any damages were sought so there will be no million dollar settlements there.

Also, I might need a bit of help from tvc on this, but in cases where injunctive relief is sought, there is at least a preliminary hearing a couple of weeks after the filing to see about at least entering a temporary restraining order. Given the dates of the articles, those hearings should have occurred by then.  Do you have any word on the disposition of those hearings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WOSgrad said:

Both of those suits are for injunctive relief, meaning that they want to prevent the enforcement of a law.  It does not appear that any damages were sought so there will be no million dollar settlements there.

Also, I might need a bit of help from tvc on this, but in cases where injunctive relief is sought, there is at least a preliminary hearing a couple of weeks after the filing to see about at least entering a temporary restraining order. Given the dates of the articles, those hearings should have occurred by then.  Do you have any word on the disposition of those hearings?

When we have filed a TRO, it has been two weeks to have a response.

 Would the injunctive relief be in the form of a Writ of Mandamus since it is a government? I would believe that time frame has passed or it was simply denied. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

When we have filed a TRO, it has been two weeks to have a response.

 Would the injunctive relief be in the form of a Writ of Mandamus since it is a government? I would believe that time frame has passed or it was simply denied. 

Because of the stage of the action, it may be a Writ of Prohibition. If I remember correctly (and I probably don’t) a Writ of Mandamus cannot be used against the president or governors of state. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JasperDAWG said:

THIS I DO KNOW AS FACT! :

maskholes like the chick in the video no matter the state are/will gonna end up costing EVERYONE the opportunities of highschool sports.

Players,parents, fans  all will suffer when the mandates  for each state, community or district continue to "bucked" and the shot callers shut it down.

I agree.

But the ones that "buck" the system will at least have the privilege of not being labeled "sheep".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,968
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    yielder
    Newest Member
    yielder
    Joined



  • Posts

    • The problem as well as that all of the social justice warriors, influencers, and instigators repeat these lies in the immediate days after the event, garnering outrage.  But when they're proven false they never go back and rescind their outrage-causing posts, they just move on to the next one.
    • I just find it really hard to believe that Trump will select a VP based on the votes they bring him.  He's going to want a Trumper that will affirm his every move and stoke his ego.  I'm hoping I'm wrong, but I doubt it.  And as you said, in these battle ground states a few tenths of a % point may be enough to swing the whole election.  Trump can't afford a VP who will cost him votes (Noem would cost him full points, not just tenths), but also needs a candidate that will bring in as many votes as possible.  So hopefully whichever Trump disciple he chooses has some political appeal to swing voters.
    • Good news for this district is for the next two seasons your bi district opposition shouldn’t be much of a challenge… Royal may be better next year but other than that the district is pretty rough… Very good chance that it’s a clean sweep though
    • It’s terrible no matter what happened. I am always concerned with the news media and social media outright lies or incorrect information that is put out, maybe in a rush to be first. Watching the video, it is easy to see that some of the earlier claims are simply nonsense. The officer might be cleared or he might face trial but we should be disgusted with the misinformation. Having been on scene or shortly after an officer involved shooting three times, I can say that some information that comes out is a complete fabrication. This is a horrible situation no matter who was at fault. I wish that the nonsensical false information would stop. That won’t happen…..  
    • Trump walks to the beat of a different drummer so he could very likely pick a person that is on no one’s radar. Going by typical political logic, assuming that a VP pick might bring 0.5%-1% votes, who should it be? A half to one percent is not much but in a potentially razor thin election, a couple of thousand votes in a state could decide the presidency. Biden won AZ by just over 10,000 votes. The most recent Beaumont mayoral election, where almost no one votes, had over 15,000 votes cast. In GA it was 12,000 votes and Biden did not even get 50%. In WI it was 20,000 and again Biden didn’t get to 50%.  There are other states in that area of percent point difference. How important? If any two AZ, GA and WI flip, Trump would have won. So while the VP probably never matters…. can it this time? I think that it could. What then does the VP pick bring to the table? FL and SC were both won by Trump in 2020 so a favored son vote for Rubio or Scott won’t help Trump. Both are in a fairly comfortable position within the conservative community so they will neither hurt nor help with strong conservative voters.  What about the few fence riders that could and likely will determine the election by either sticking with Biden or switching from the last election? What about the people who did not vote in the last election, but may come out to vote in this one just to support the VP candidate? Could Scott sway a percentage point or two from Black support? Could Rubio help draw a percentage point or two of Hispanic support? Possibly on both counts. Like I already mentioned, they won’t help in their own states because Trump already won those in 2020. I personally think that either would actually do a good job as president (although VP picks are about the politics of being elected and not the “best” possible president) and might be the difference in a few votes but a few votes more is all that is needed.  Or…. My outlier, Tulsi Gabbard.  She had some decent support when are ran for the presidency in the Democrat primary. Could some people follow her because they support her and not necessarily the party? I’m sure that’s true for all candidates. Could she bring female support? As a strong mentally and physically person and a member of the military who was deployed into a combat zone into Iraq. Then she went to OCS and became an officer, then deployed to Kuwait. Can that military history, including deployment into a war swing some votes? As of late, she has been on a one person tirade against Biden and the Democrats. Let’s remember that Ronald Reagan was a Democrat and so was Texas governor John Connally. Connally was not only a Democrat governor in Texas but also Secretary of the Navy under JFK. Both ended up switching to the Republican Party so there is a fairly strong history of former Democrats switching parties and being successful, all the way up to the presidency. Gabbard is a pretty fiery campaigner and doesn’t mince her words. She would really be a thorn in the Democrats’ hopes and has the inside knowledge of the party. Could she potentially swing more votes than Scott or Rubio? I think so. But…. I don’t think that Trump would pick her and I’m not sure that she would accept if offered. Her odds of being Trump's pick are at about 1%.  Scott or Rubio at about 10%. Trump being Trump, will choose someone who no one has ever heard of. 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...