On a slightly more serious note...

Actually was looking for a "hand-in"!

Perhaps a "hand-on?" Time for fun with prepositions!

How about in, out, in, out, in, out, then on? Then home.

Without hands on , or hands in the hobby wouldn't be much fun...lol. Dang Britney , filthy liberal? Ha I thought you smelled rather great.

I'm curious to hear what others think of this. It's apparently legal to shoot us if we don't fuck you for some reason.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...sex/?mobile=nc Originally Posted by SexyBritneyJ

may be if a hooker takes the money and dont do IT with you in TEXES and that is steeling the money see. i showed it to my freind and thats what he says.

Well, yeah. It's most definitely stealing. I just don't think it should be legal to shoot and kill someone over $150. She wasn't posing an immediate threat to his person or anything.

i think the lessen is if your gonna be a hooker in TEXES you beter do IT good and dont steel from nobuddy.

i think the lessen is if your gonna be a hooker in TEXES you beter do IT good and dont steel from nobuddy. Originally Posted by Tits McFloppin

I think an even better lesson would be "don't be a hooker in Texas".

Maybe we could use that to market ourselves to get Dallas, Houston, Austin and SA ladies to come visit? "Come to Tennessee, providers! We can't shoot you if you keep the money and don't put out!"



Cheers,

bcg

When I got my 1st gun, my daddy told me "Remember: there are 2 sides to every story. Unless 1 of the 2 are dead." It's a mandate I repeat to my own kids - if you're gonna shoot, shoot to kill.

Unfortunately, there is only 1 side to the story as the "other side" died at the scene. Maybe she did show with the intent to rob. Maybe something went south. There are 3 sides to every side, your side, my side and the truth. Sometimes all 3 sides differ from each other.

What is easy to guess is this was a case of bad meeting worse. Do I think the guy is scum? Yep. Do I think a life is worth 150? Nope. And I think everyone here agrees - in theory.
But Britt, you didnt ask the right question. Ask if a hooker's life is worth 150. On second thought...why bother to ask when we already have the answer?

If she was somehow violent or aggressive towards him, I'm pretty sure he would have brought that up as part of his defense.

And I don't think it tells you in that article, but she was shot in the back and neck when Gilbert shot at the car while it was driving away.

She didn't die at the scene. She died seven months later.

While I feel certain that no one has the truth of the story, I feel fairly confident in saying that the man wasn't in harm's way, and really just wanted his $150 back.

BCG, why would you want to import providers when you have such wonderful local talent already?

BCG, why would you want to import providers when you have such wonderful local talent already? Originally Posted by SexyBritneyJ

We have wonderful local talent, but do we have enough of it? (The bcg family motto: "Too much is never enough.")

Besides, for all you know that wonderful local talent may know me well enough to know they don't want to see me, leaving me to imported talent in order to satisfy my minimum monthly requirement of sin and degradation...



Cheers,

bcg

Everything I read was that this was not a case of self defense. It was a case about a commercial transaction that went awry. It amazes me that people on the jury could justify this result. Its one thing to say that this man values very little about the loss of life but its another for 12 people to support. I would be interested to see the makeup of this jury.

On a postive note the police did investigate and charge him, the DA supported that decision and prosecuted it and the Judge let the case get to the Jury and did not summarily dismiss it. It's not tthat the whole system is corrupt but apparently some people are just stupid and they often sit on juries.

The good thing is that there are far more people that are outraged than content with this result, I guess my faith in humanity will have to rest with that.

Everything I read was that this was not a case of self defense. It was a case about a commercial transaction that went awry. It amazes me that people on the jury could justify this result. Its one thing to say that this man values very little about the loss of life but its another for 12 people to support. I would be interested to see the makeup of this jury.

On a postive note the police did investigate and charge him, the DA supported that decision and prosecuted it and the Judge let the case get to the Jury and did not summarily dismiss it. It's not tthat the whole system is corrupt but apparently some people are just stupid and they often sit on juries.

The good thing is that there are far more people that are outraged than content with this result, I guess my faith in humanity will have to rest with that. Originally Posted by Buzzman1971

In a previous incarnation when I was engaged in the malpractice of law, An Older And Wiser Lawyer once pointed out that miscarriages of justice pretty much occur at random, and they benefit the defense as often as they benefit the prosecution. (Another Older And Wiser Lawyer once put it this way: "When I was young and starting out in practice, I lost a lot of cases that I should have won. Now that I am older and have years of experience, I've won a lot of cases I should have lost. So in the end, justice was served.") It happens that people get away with murder (it didn't start, and most certainly didn't end, with O.J.).

"On a slightly more serious note" (if I may be forgiven a Title Drop), if "some people [who] are just that stupid" sat on this jury and rendered this verdict, blame the prosecutor who obviously sucked at jury selection.

Cheers,

bcg

I agree BCG - excellent points. But don't forget this was Texas so you can't blame the prosecutor for having dumb jurrors I bet the "pickens' was slim."

I should have titled this thread "An Excuse To Bash Texas."