davjohns

Aren't they also allowed to use lights and sirens when late for coffee and donuts? We taught some decision making like that in the Academy. However, you can also look at the clock and get a different story. I have called / written more than one Chief / Sheriff to describe following their marked car driving like crazy in order to get back to the station for shift-change. I've also seen many marked cars driving far too fast on the freeway when far from their jurisdiction and in civilian clothes. They were clearly at a training event and OK with making cops look bad by speeding with the knowledge they will not get pulled over. Then, there's one of my favorites...illegal parking (in a handicapped space) because the cop is too fat / lazy to walk in order to take a routine report. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

That's her. Not necessarily my type, but definitely impressive. Began hormone therapy at 14 and had surgery at 19. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I agree that is a bad saying. The original quote of General Shurz was, "My country, right or wrong. If right, to be kept right. If wrong, to be set right." Much better. I hate the addage that there is 'no such thing as a dumb question'. There certainly is. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Have we discussed this? I can't find it. I've seen pictures of her. If the downstairs was done with the skill of the upstairs, I would have never known. Saw a picture of her as a ten year old boy. She was a pretty boy. Makes you wonder if there wasn't something chemical going on even then. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Wow, I bet the DA is relieved to know that. When he got off the phone with me, he said he would sleep very well. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I saw this on ABC's website. Quick research revealed that the lead only said he didn't quite believe Zimmerman. The DA decided prosecution was a losing deal. I agree with the DA. Pursuing Zimmerman would waste taxpayer money. But it looks like the mob might get its way at this point. The media is having a great time. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

If you believe in miracles; everything is a miracle. If not; nothing is a miracle. This case reminds me of that. Some people want to believe Zimmerman did wrong and they will take any lack of evidence and run with it. Some people start out without presumptions and see that the facts do not support his guilt. Most of the arguments for Zimmerman doing wrong rely on not enough blood, not enough witnesses, witnesses who came forward must be lying, police bungled it, the young man's record isn't admissible evidence, Zimmerman must be racist because the young man was black...lack of evidence that he did right is not evidence that he did wrong. Presuming witnesses are unreliable and police are incompetent does not make a case. Some people seem to be demanding perfect knowledge of his innocence before giving him a chance. You have to begin with the presumption of guilt for these arguments to hold any water. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Wow. This whole thing just seems like a conspiracy theory to me. The police on the scene refused to arrest. There is at least one corroborating witness. The young man has a history. I've seen no indication the shooter had racist tendancies. He was the neighborhood watch captain, so he seems civic minded. His story matches the facts as far as we can know them right now. The police don't seem to have an issue with his story. So...it's a coverup to protect the hispanic guy? Not enough blood? Why didn't the police make him go to the hospital? Sloppy police work? Geez. I don't know what happened. I wasn't there. But I see no evidence that the police gummed it up or that there is a conspiracy. No evidence of racism. Even the pictures of the cute little boy are misleading. Give it a rest. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Yup. Googled it. Three Jetblue and one American planes for seven hours. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Don't get me wrong. I am a big fan of the flight attendant stunt. I thought it was classic. But Jetblue does seem to be getting a bit of bad publicity lately compared to others. Who was it that left the passengers on the runway for hours? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Wasn't Jetblue the one that had the male attendant chew everyone out on the PA, grab two beers and hit the emergency slide for an exit? What does the Jetblue HR department use to pick employees? Dice? Ouija board? We have a spare uniform in your size...you're hired? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Not at all. I'm perfectly willing to help out a fellow human being in cases of life, limb or eyesight. Maybe some more that I would have to give more thought to. But my experience has been that too many people use the ER as a healthcare system so they don't have to pay for anything. It clogs up the ER and costs the rest of us. And, yes. I have spent many hours in ERs and know quite well what goes on there. When I was a cop, we posted someone in the ER constantly. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I'm not suggesting anything. I find it highly suspicious that a guy with a *claimed* head injury is not taken to the ER by the police as SOP. You can't force anyone to go to the hospital. When I was a cop, we had to talk people into going all the time. The guy is handcuffed - he is in police custody. What if he really had a serious head injury such as brain bleeding (which may not manifest itself with symptoms for hours)? He'd have a great civil case against the PD. If your PD held suspects with possible head injuries and did not get them medically examined, your PD was, IMO, delinquent in its duties. You typically handcuff someone in this situation just for safety. You don't know what happened and don't want to take chances. Now, if he is under arrest, you would have to get him examined and cleared by a doc before the jail would take him. That's different. He's pure custodial arrest at that point. If you just have him cuffed for safety and then release him, you can't make him submit to medical attention. In this case, there doesn't appear to have been any reason to arrest him. There was only one story. It was uncontestested. It didn't present a criminal act. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I didn't know the GOP platform supported that. I really wish voting Libertarian wasn't throwing away a vote. More parties would be so nice. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

"Could-a" You mean *after* he could have self-inflicted some damage? Yes, I'm sure he had someone smash his head against a sidewalk and break his nose the next day as directed by the Police to cover up this huge racist conspiracy. Lots of things COULD have happened because the police work appears to have been very sloppy. I am not claiming to know what happened. I just think there are gaping holes in the "evidence". This isn't the first claim that I've seen about sloppy police work. I'm a former cop. Not necessarily a fan. Some are very good. Some are criminals in uniform. But I don't see evidence of poor work. Two guys were involved. One is dead. Not much use interviewing him. Forensics says he was shot at close range. The live guy has a story that accounts for that. The phone call to dispatch is consistent with the living guy's story. There appears to be someone who claims they heard calls and saw something consistent with the living guy's story. The living guy's story does not present a crime for which he can be charged. He's sent home. You canvass for witnesses. All wintesses I am aware of corroborate the living guy's story. There's no video that I know of. The only recording is of the living guy trying to cooperate with authorities like a good little citizen. Forensics might show the dead guy was in a struggle and shot. Forensics might show the living guy was in a struggle and fired a weapon. There might be scratch marks and skin tissue consistent with a struggle. What are people looking for when they describe shoddy police investigation? Waterboard the living guy? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Which conservatives support it??? I'll poke them right in the eye! Damn. They'll probably go to the ER on my dime....this is messed up. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I'm not suggesting anything. I find it highly suspicious that a guy with a *claimed* head injury is not taken to the ER by the police as SOP. You can't force anyone to go to the hospital. When I was a cop, we had to talk people into going all the time. Sometimes, they refused and we knew full well there would be a call from them later when they realized they needed to go. Only once they pass out does the law allow you to take them against their stated desires. Once they are unconscious, the law of most states says that they would request assistance if able. I saw some posts on the 'stand your ground' law ealier in the thread. I don't think it applies here. If the story (as I understand it) is presented in court and believed, Mr. Z was trying to leave when assaulted. Once under his assailant, fleeing wasn't really an option. By the way...if I had only the testimony and facts that are available right now in the press to go on...I would only prosecute this case if I was an elected official trying to mollify the mob. There is no way to get to 'beyond a reasonable doubt' in this case that I can see. I've always told people, "If you have to shoot someone, shoot to kill. Unload the weapon and wait for the police. Tell them you are very upset and would like to talk to your attorney before making a statement." If there were only two witnesses and one is dead, it's hard to put together a criminal prosecution. Ben Franklin said, "Two may keep a secret if one is dead". It is unlikely we will ever know what truly happened that night. But unless Mr. Z is a complete idiot; his attorney is; or he ignores his attorney; conviction is highly unlikely. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Faux News is nothing but propaganda! CNN is the only one without a bias. (No. I didn't keep a straight face while typing. I think they all have a bias and are all pretty obvious about it.) It's harder than it sounds. You try it. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

BS - Worked two or three part time jobs at once and served in the Army Reserve the first couple of years. Went to work full time as a cop and continued in the Army Reserve the last couple. Paid cash as I went. Used Pell Grant. MS - Went at night while serving on active duty. Paid cash as I went. Used Army Tuition Assistance. MS #2 - Same. JD - Went at night while working in a law office full time and serving in the Army Reserve. Paid cash as I went. Working on a PhD with GI Bill benefits. Total debt acquired = none Paying off the debt my wife acquired before we married and now paying cash for her education + GI Bill benefits. It can be done. You just have to prioritize education and be willing to do what it takes. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Wonder what would happen if, just for a day, everyone on here who usually argues from a liberal standpoint took the conservative approach and vice versa... I'm quite certain some of us would be unable. At least not without more sarcasm than the law allows. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I'm spending a day as a liberal to see what it feels like. Ban guns that are a helpful tool. Promote legalized drugs that have no positive use at all. Kill unborn babies, but don't kill mass murderers. Abuse your health and claim you have a right to health care at someone else's expense. I think I need a bath already. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Please don't go around suggesting people should be responsible for their own actions. It's so un-progressive of you. It is surely the guns that are wrong. That's why they should be banned. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Are you advocating keeping a loaded shotgun in the home for self defense, instead of keeping it locked up in a safe where it's not immediately accessible? I'm advocating that a shotgun is a better home defense weapon than a handgun. Storing either of them safely is a different issue. Putting a loaded handgun under a mattress doesn't seem like such a good idea. So how would you safely store your shotgun to prevent unauthorized users from gaining access to it, while at the same time making it immediately available to you for home defense? Over your shoulder? Gun rack in the truck? When I was younger, every truck in the SouthEast had a gun rack in the back window. It was normal. High School students had them in the back window of their truck in the school parking lot because they went deer hunting before school. It was never a problem. Makes you wonder what changed about the guns that things are so different today... I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

well, the fee he's referring to is his carry permit. Not an ownership permit. That doesn't exist in TX. The carry permit is good for at least 4 years. In some cases almost 6 (a renewed license expires on your next birthday after 5 years, so if your timing is right, you could almost get 6 years out of the fee). So John's cost to carry his gun is < $7/year, not > $110. His ownership cost to the state is zero. Kelp was referring to the NY permit with his cost analysis, not TX. Get a shotgun instead - the NYC shotgun permit is way cheaper and the shotgun is a better home defense weapon anyway. ???? If true (first I've heard of it), then there is a fee that is not calculated to cover the costs of background checks, but just to disuade people from a constitutional right. Is that what I'm hearing? Besides, background checks are already provided at time of purchase and cost nothing to the state. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Get a room, you two! Too many lawyers in here for me. :) I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.