Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

Agreed. I think there is a lot of irony in the racial bias and aspect to this. By most accounts The Anthony's are probably more well-off and more a fit to the Frisco demographic and mold (except for the black name) than the victim. Despite this, most people in the area are going to react with a racial bias as you said, because the main reason for moving to Frisco in the first place is to get away from the false idea in their head about gang or racial violence caused by poor blacks on the unfortunate white victims (aka white flight). In my opinion, at least.

Lots of whites and Asians named Anthony.  Even Hispanics use that name.  Remember Anthony Munoz 

Posted (edited)

Funny thing about Frisco, like a lot of the Dallas exurbs.  It was originally a farm/rail depot town.  So to some degree full of white rurals that were liable to be pretty racist and insular in their thinking.  And, of course, home of the "Fightin Coons," which fairly obviously was not intentionally racist (do you really think a bunch of segregationist white rurals would adopt a mascot akin to "Fightin Naggers"?)

During its massive expansion, it has attracted a huge influx of pretty diverse people, including a lot of South and East Asians.  It's only barely majority white.

The associated rise in property values has probably enriched a substantial number of the old-school Frisco'ers, who may not be as progressive as the recent immigrants and broader demographics might indicate.  Sometimes that creates a somewhat toxic entrenched power structure, like McKinney and to a lesser extent Plano.  And, of course, the rapidly changing demographics fuel things like replacement theory.

I don't know if any of that is specifically true with respect to Frisco, but that seems to be the general dynamic of Dallas exurbs, if not exurbs everywhere.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Funny thing about Frisco, like a lot of the Dallas exurbs.  It was originally a farm/rail depot town.  So to some degree full of white rurals that were liable to be pretty racist and insular in their thinking.  And, of course, home of the "Fightin Coons," which fairly obviously was not intentionally racist (do you really think a bunch of segregationist white rurals would adopt a mascot akin to "Fightin Naggers"?)

During its massive expansion, it has attracted a huge influx of pretty diverse people, including a lot of South and East Asians.  It's only barely majority white.

The associated rise in property values has probably enriched a substantial number of the old-school Frisco'ers, who may not be as progressive as the recent immigrants and broader demographics might indicate.  Sometimes that creates a somewhat toxic entrenched power structure, like McKinney and to a lesser extent Plano.  And, of course, the rapidly changing demographics fuel things like replacement theory.

I don't know if any of that is specifically true with respect to Frisco, but that seems to be the general dynamic of Dallas exurbs, if not exurbs everywhere.

If you didn't know the facts and data, you would swear that Frisco was majority Indian or Southeast Asian, to your point.

In my experience, the older Indian & Southeast asians are every bit as insular and racist against blacks as the older and rural whites you described. And the whole reason Indian and Southeast Asians chose Frisco in droves (like Plano before it) was because the free education (public schools) was the best in the area. That usually equates to less of the black and non-asian brown populations.

Anyways, not to derail too much about the demographics and culture of Frisco, but I do think that the location of this crime is somewhat driving the story at a local and increasingly national level.

I've heard and read more about the Frisco stabbing weeks later than I have about the Wilmer Hutchins (extremely poor and black area) shooting of just a few days ago, for example.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Without diminishing the tragedy of this, the victim is gone and there's nothing anyone can do about that.  All there really is to talk about is the aftermath.  And the precursors.

 

The entire US/state police and penal system was designed to do something about it. Saying there is nothing to be done about it? I bet the Metcalf and Anthony family would disagree that nothing is being done about it.

That said, how many times have you seen Austin Metcalf's name in the thread? What if any details have been discussed about who he was, what he liked, his passion, his life, his dreams. 

Your take that he's dead who cares is exactly what is/was wrong with the vast majority of criminal investigation documentaries and news coverage. Name 2 victims of Ted Bundy, name 1 from Jeffery Dahmer, 1 from John Wayne Gacy, hell name a victim of Epstein. I'm betting you can't because historically the focus has been on the life of the predator. Fortunately, there is a strong trend surfacing to talk in more depth about the victims of these events rather than just the perpetrators. Their lives and what the perpetrators took from the world rather than JUST the criminals themselves. 

Forgetting the victims of crime and dismissing them with statements like "the victim is gone and there is nothing anyone can do about it" is diminishing the suffering of the families, not honoring the life of the victim and dismissive of the criminal justice systems part in the story. 

Why are there memorials for 911, OKC bombing, and a multitude of other deaths? Saying they are dead and there is nothing anyone can do about it disturbs me greatly.

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's kind of amusing that certain people on the thread are indulging and repeating every factual rumor while shitting on people discussing the "known facts," and discussing potential legal ramifications on those facts and how more information might influence them.

I suppose it was inevitable, as foretold by the opening racially tinged tweetthing Derka posted, that this would devolve into a racial shitshow.

Derka is a freakin oracle man

Edited by chainsaw
Posted
5 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

If you didn't know the facts and data, you would swear that Frisco was majority Indian or Southeast Asian, to your point.

In my experience, the older Indian & Southeast asians are every bit as insular and racist against blacks as the older and rural whites you described. And the whole reason Indian and Southeast Asians chose Frisco in droves (like Plano before it) was because the free education (public schools) was the best in the area. That usually equates to less of the black and non-asian brown populations.

Anyways, not to derail too much about the demographics and culture of Frisco, but I do think that the location of this crime is somewhat driving the story at a local and increasingly national level.

I've heard and read more about the Frisco stabbing weeks later than I have about the Wilmer Hutchins (extremely poor and black area) shooting of just a few days ago, for example.

Well, the collective behavior of Dallas exurbs is a fairly constant topic around here.  And a subtext to this thread.

Posted
19 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Funny thing about Frisco, like a lot of the Dallas exurbs.  It was originally a farm/rail depot town.  So to some degree full of white rurals that were liable to be pretty racist and insular in their thinking.  And, of course, home of the "Fightin Coons," which fairly obviously was not intentionally racist (do you really think a bunch of segregationist white rurals would adopt a mascot akin to "Fightin Naggers"?)

During its massive expansion, it has attracted a huge influx of pretty diverse people, including a lot of South and East Asians.  It's only barely majority white.

The associated rise in property values has probably enriched a substantial number of the old-school Frisco'ers, who may not be as progressive as the recent immigrants and broader demographics might indicate.  Sometimes that creates a somewhat toxic entrenched power structure, like McKinney and to a lesser extent Plano.  And, of course, the rapidly changing demographics fuel things like replacement theory.

I don't know if any of that is specifically true with respect to Frisco, but that seems to be the general dynamic of Dallas exurbs, if not exurbs everywhere.

Not hard to find angry white Dallas suburbanites online saying “doesn’t feel like America anymore” or “recent demographic shift has impacted sports negatively.”  Of course that same group will brag about Dallas’s hcol as a badge of honor 

Posted
15 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

level.

I've heard and read more about the Frisco stabbing weeks later than I have about the Wilmer Hutchins (extremely poor and black area) shooting of just a few days ago, for example.

We don’t talk about school shootings anymore either.  It’s just not a rare occurrence tragically.  
 

how many times has a murder happened at a track meet?

Posted
54 minutes ago, WineGuy69 said:

Of course, if it was reversed, riots, protest, national outrage, vigils, etc etc

Huh, last I saw on this thread was a rally/protest to address “the scourge of black violence against white Americans.” 

Posted
8 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

The entire US/state police and penal system was designed to do something about it. Saying there is nothing to be done about it? I bet the Metcalf and Anthony family would disagree that nothing is being done about it.

That said, how many times have you seen Austin Metcalf's name in the thread? What if any details have been discussed about who he was, what he liked, his passion, his life, his dreams. 

Your take that he's dead who cares is exactly what is/was wrong with the vast majority of criminal investigation documentaries and news coverage. Name 2 victims of Ted Bundy, name 1 from Jeffery Dahmer, 1 from John Wayne Gacy, hell name a victim of Epstein. I'm betting you can't because historically the focus has been on the life of the predator. Fortunately, there is a strong trend surfacing to talk in more depth about the victims of these events rather than just the perpetrators. Their lives and what the perpetrators took from the world rather than JUST the criminals themselves. 

Forgetting the victims of crime and dismissing them with statements like "the victim is gone and there is nothing anyone can do about it" is diminishing the suffering of the families, not honoring the life of the victim and dismissive of the criminal justice systems part in the story. 

Why are there memorials for 911, OKC bombing, and a multitude of other deaths? Saying they are dead and there is nothing anyone can do about it disturbs me greatly.

I consider all of those things you mentioned the aftermath, the what are we gonna do now.

And, I disagree that the US justice system is or should be designed to serve victims.  It serves society broadly, which includes both victims and accused, and the rest of us.

Should the justice system take into account the victim?  Sure.  But I think some of the more recent efforts to do so have over-emphasized victims rights.

But, you do have a point that often the discussion of the aftermath focuses too heavily on the accused/perpetrator, to the point that they become quasi-celebrities, and possibly inspiration for other perps.  Some of that is inherent to the fact that that is the only thing we can "deal with" on an ongoing basis.

Should we remember or celebrate the life of the victim?  Sure.  I would submit, however, that not all crime victims' lives are worthy of celebration.  That they died a tragic, premature death at the hands of someone else doesn't necessarily or automatically make them worthy of celebration society-wide.  Note that this comment is of a general nature and not a commentary on Austin Metcalf.

Inherent in all of this is the measurement of the value of one human life against another.  That's some heavy shit when you think about it.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
17 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

So much of a lawdog's daily work is tedious and/or mindless.  It demands some kind of break or you'll go insane.

Pomodoro method.

23 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Huh, last I saw on this thread was a rally/protest to address “the scourge of black violence against white Americans.” 

I'm sure a Jacksonville city block will become a lawless zone any minute now.

Posted
48 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Funny thing about Frisco, like a lot of the Dallas exurbs.  It was originally a farm/rail depot town.  So to some degree full of white rurals that were liable to be pretty racist and insular in their thinking.  And, of course, home of the "Fightin Coons," which fairly obviously was not intentionally racist (do you really think a bunch of segregationist white rurals would adopt a mascot akin to "Fightin Naggers"?)

During its massive expansion, it has attracted a huge influx of pretty diverse people, including a lot of South and East Asians.  It's only barely majority white.

The associated rise in property values has probably enriched a substantial number of the old-school Frisco'ers, who may not be as progressive as the recent immigrants and broader demographics might indicate.  Sometimes that creates a somewhat toxic entrenched power structure, like McKinney and to a lesser extent Plano.  And, of course, the rapidly changing demographics fuel things like replacement theory.

I don't know if any of that is specifically true with respect to Frisco, but that seems to be the general dynamic of Dallas exurbs, if not exurbs everywhere.

 

Frisco was fine. In the late 90s, early 2000s, Frisco High was in the same district as Gainesville. We would routinely beat them in everything because, well, we had athletes and they had lanky white dudes. Well, my senior year (99-00), for the first time, Frisco High had Blacks on their team. We were Gainesville so we had Blacks always, granted we were a bit country, but we were still athletic nonetheless. It was also the first year they opened their new high school and had plans to build a 2nd. Goin to Frisco my Fresh, Soph, and Junior years compared to my Senior year was crazy nuts. It was like that city exploded overnight. 

Frisco attracted the White Flight folks from Dallas, Plano, Lewisville, The Colony, etc. And now, even Lewisville and Flower Mound, which used to be the “it” burbs of Dallas, are finding themselves playing second and third fiddle to Frisco, Prosper, Melissa, and Celina. Hell, even Little Elm started getting Blacks moving in there. 

Yes, there are a few of the old guard Whites still in Frisco, but nothing like it was before. That is why this incident was surprising to me. 

 

Posted (edited)

I just read the first 2 pages to this. Is there anything other than derka defending his choice of Twitter source, imamac insisting it’s extremely difficult to kill someone with one stab, and discussing race relations on the subsequent 18 pages? 

Edited by heso
Posted
4 minutes ago, heso said:

I just read the first 2 pages to this. Is there anything other than derka defending his choice of Twitter source, imamac insisting it’s extremely difficult to kill someone with one stab, and discussing race relations on the subsequent 18 pages? 

There was a tangential argument about athletes from one school never/sometimes/always hanging out at another school's tent.  I regret my part of that.

  • Haha 4
Posted
5 minutes ago, heso said:

I just read the first 2 pages to this. Is there anything other than derka defending his choice of Twitter source, imamac insisting it’s extremely difficult to kill someone with one stab, and discussing race relations on the subsequent 18 pages? 

There's people arguing about what exactly constitutes murder, people arguing about the facts of the case when no one knows them currently except the people involved/who were there/the cops, and people being duped by fake news stories about the killer's family using gofundme funds to buy houses and cars. Other than that, no, not really.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

There's people arguing about what exactly constitutes murder, people arguing about the facts of the case when no one knows them currently except the people involved/who were there/the cops, and people being duped by fake news stories about the killer's family using gofundme funds to buy houses and cars. Other than that, no, not really.

The definition of the term and every word of "Intent to cause serious bodily harm" has been an ongoing beating consistently and repeatedly.

Knife fighting skills have been discussed in depth.

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
 
Frisco was fine. In the late 90s, early 2000s, Frisco High was in the same district as Gainesville. We would routinely beat them in everything because, well, we had athletes and they had lanky white dudes. Well, my senior year (99-00), for the first time, Frisco High had Blacks on their team. We were Gainesville so we had Blacks always, granted we were a bit country, but we were still athletic nonetheless. It was also the first year they opened their new high school and had plans to build a 2nd. Goin to Frisco my Fresh, Soph, and Junior years compared to my Senior year was crazy nuts. It was like that city exploded overnight. 
Frisco attracted the White Flight folks from Dallas, Plano, Lewisville, The Colony, etc. And now, even Lewisville and Flower Mound, which used to be the “it” burbs of Dallas, are finding themselves playing second and third fiddle to Frisco, Prosper, Melissa, and Celina. Hell, even Little Elm started getting Blacks moving in there. 
Yes, there are a few of the old guard Whites still in Frisco, but nothing like it was before. That is why this incident was surprising to me. 
 

Roughly two decades prior, the same DISD “flight” took place. Dad was the FBHC/AD at DeSoto from 70-83. His ‘83 team had 4-5 black players on the team. Mom and/or Dad of those players had “white collar” jobs like Doctors, Lawyers, or Accountants (etc) in Dallas.

As a Jr High kid, I went wherever the team went with Dad. Hell, why not. We’d pull up in the bus for track meets as others are pulling in and if some predominantly “black” bus pulled in close by, I’d nudge Dad in the seat and say that bus looks fast. He’d just say it’s going to be a great track meet and great test for his Eagles.

If you look at the population % of race in DeSoto athletics now, you’d think I was crazy.

Hook’em!!!
  • Haha 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

The definition of the term and every word of "Intent to cause bodily harm" has been an ongoing beating consistently and repeatedly.

you forgot the most important word: serious

Posted
38 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I consider all of those things you mentioned the aftermath, the what are we gonna do now.

And, I disagree that the US justice system is or should be designed to serve victims.  It serves society broadly, which includes both victims and accused, and the rest of us.

Should the justice system take into account the victim?  Sure.  But I think some of the more recent efforts to do so have over-emphasized victims rights.

But, you do have a point that often the discussion of the aftermath focuses too heavily on the accused/perpetrator, to the point that they become quasi-celebrities, and possibly inspiration for other perps.  Some of that is inherent to the fact that that is the only thing we can "deal with" on an ongoing basis.

Should we remember or celebrate the life of the victim?  Sure.  I would submit, however, that not all crime victims' lives are worthy of celebration.  That they died a tragic, premature death at the hands of someone else doesn't necessarily or automatically make them worthy of celebration society-wide.  Note that this comment is of a general nature and not a commentary on Austin Metcalf.

Inherent in all of this is the measurement of the value of one human life against another.  That's some heavy shit when you think about it.

What, exactly, would you say is the purpose of the US criminal justice systems if not to serve the interest of the deceased and their family in a homicide? In my world view the entire purpose of a homicide investigation is to hold the party accountable for the crime and help bring what little closure is possible for the family in the name/memory of the victim.

I would further argue that many homicide detectives take this obligation to the victims and their family seriously and personally. Its on record and well documented that many such investigators have continued said obligations long after the case has grown cold and post the end of those careers. Not just to punish the murderer but in the memory of the victim and the victims family. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
19 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

What, exactly, would you say is the purpose of the US criminal justice systems if not to serve the interest of the deceased and their family in a homicide? In my world view the entire purpose of a homicide investigation is to hold the party accountable for the crime and help bring what little closure is possible for the family in the name/memory of the victim.

I would further argue that many homicide detectives take this obligation to the victims and their family seriously and personally. Its on record and well documented that many such investigators have continued said obligations long after the case has grown cold and post the end of those careers. Not just to punish the murderer but in the memory of the victim and the victims family. 

All of that should be true as part of the overall package, but the purpose of the criminal justice system is to serve the state -- that is, society as a whole.  That's why each prosecution is "The State of Texas v. BurntEyes," not "The victims of BurntEye's bizarre sex crime v. BurntEyes."  Society has the interest in protecting society as a whole from criminals, including imprisoning them so they don't commit further harm, rehabilitating them so that they don't harm any other members of society once they are free, etc.  And yes, we can have a long discussion about how our system isn't doing so great at those things, but that's a question of execution, not purpose.

The victim/family are the most affected members of society, and they stand as a good proxy for what a prosecution should accomplish.  And, the system is made of human beings; it is right and good that the victim/family are treated seriously, and that cops and prosecutors take the duty to them personally.  But in the end, they are all serving the state (society as a whole), not just the victim/family.

Not to go off on a tangent, but rather to show that this is a consistent approach, that's also the purpose of public schools.  The purpose is not to educate your kid, or my kid, but rather to educate all of the children of the state so that the state has an educated population.  These purposes are GOOD things, because they reflect our common interest and purpose.  ALL of us should want, and benefit from, controlled crime.  ALL of us should want, and benefit from, an educated population.  Even if nobody in my family was murdered, I'm better off if that murderer is off the streets.  Even if I don't have kids, I'm better off if the kids in this state are educated (and thus have a viable social and economic future, instead of being worthless and likely criminals).  The common good.  We should pay attention to that.

Posted
It's kind of amusing that certain people on the thread are indulging and repeating every factual rumor while shitting on people discussing the "known facts," and discussing potential legal ramifications on those facts and how more information might influence them.
I suppose it was inevitable, as foretold by the opening racially tinged tweetthing Derka posted, that this would devolve into a racial shitshow.

I know exactly where the Dad’s house that was swatted is. It’s 1700 sq ft (1986) valued at about 398k. Don’t know if he owns or leases.
Posted
9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

That's why each prosecution is "The State of Texas v. BurntEyes," not "The victims of BurntEye's bizarre sex crime v. BurntEyes." 

You can lose the criminal trial but win the civil trial, and then rename the book to "I DID IT"

Posted
On 4/17/2025 at 8:59 AM, Skipper said:

This.  JFC this site never ceases to amaze.

Nope. 

On 4/17/2025 at 9:06 AM, chainsaw said:

This is the point I'm making. Right now we don't have proof of intent to seriously injure. Wait for evidence.

You’re a…

On 4/17/2025 at 9:51 AM, chainsaw said:

It's evidence but not proof.

…moron. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Funny thing about Frisco, like a lot of the Dallas exurbs.  It was originally a farm/rail depot town.  

Hey don't forget the whore houses in the trailers of Preston! 

Posted
30 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

All of that should be true as part of the overall package, but the purpose of the criminal justice system is to serve the state -- that is, society as a whole.  That's why each prosecution is "The State of Texas v. BurntEyes," not "The victims of BurntEye's bizarre sex crime v. BurntEyes."  Society has the interest in protecting society as a whole from criminals, including imprisoning them so they don't commit further harm, rehabilitating them so that they don't harm any other members of society once they are free, etc.  And yes, we can have a long discussion about how our system isn't doing so great at those things, but that's a question of execution, not purpose.

The victim/family are the most affected members of society, and they stand as a good proxy for what a prosecution should accomplish.  And, the system is made of human beings; it is right and good that the victim/family are treated seriously, and that cops and prosecutors take the duty to them personally.  But in the end, they are all serving the state (society as a whole), not just the victim/family.

Not to go off on a tangent, but rather to show that this is a consistent approach, that's also the purpose of public schools.  The purpose is not to educate your kid, or my kid, but rather to educate all of the children of the state so that the state has an educated population.  These purposes are GOOD things, because they reflect our common interest and purpose.  ALL of us should want, and benefit from, controlled crime.  ALL of us should want, and benefit from, an educated population.  Even if nobody in my family was murdered, I'm better off if that murderer is off the streets.  Even if I don't have kids, I'm better off if the kids in this state are educated (and thus have a viable social and economic future, instead of being worthless and likely criminals).  The common good.  We should pay attention to that.

I fully understand and don't disagree which is why I put hold the party responsible accountable first. 

Yes, on the broad stroke the criminal justice systems service is in the name of the state on behalf of the people not the individual, but as with all items the devil is in the details. I like to believe you and Twice both believe that our criminal justice system is in place to bring forth justice, dont you? Let's take a look at the legal definition of justice as described by the Cornell Law School that I hope we can agree is a fair arbiter of the word, legally.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/justice

Spoiler
justice

Justice has three meanings:

  • Justice is the ethical , philosophical idea that people are to be treated impartially, fairly, properly, and reasonably by the law and by arbiters of the law, that laws are to ensure that no harm befalls another, and that, where harm is alleged, a remedial action is taken - both the accuser and the accused receive a morally right consequence merited by their actions (see: due process ).
  • Justice is a legal structure or system that is designed to judge in a general sense who should be accorded a benefit or burden when the law is applied to a person’s factual circumstances.
  • Justice is a title conferred upon a judge of the U.S. Supreme Court , the federal courts of appeal , or the state courts of appeal.

Justice has three meanings:

(For purposes of discussion and because the second two were covered by both you and Twice I'll focus on the first)

Justice is the ethical , philosophical idea that people are to be treated impartially, fairly, properly, and reasonably by the law and by arbiters of the law, that laws are to ensure that no harm befalls another, and that, where harm is alleged, a remedial action is taken - both the accuser and the accused receive a morally right consequence merited by their actions

So, I would argue that while the criminal justice system absolutely does serve the people in a broad aspect, in the name of justice it also strives to serve the victims (and those accused) of the crime to receive a morally right consequence, to use the Cornell Law definition. 

Likely this falls into a semantics discussion but I ask, what is a criminal justice system without morally right consequence and justice for the victims? Who are will killing in the name of? 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
That’s a trailer park in Frisco right?

No. Maybe fourth development in Frisco. Probably sold for around 100k in 1990.

The trailer park is Lebanon. Where Elvis used to live. It’s back behind where April’s Nude Modeling was. I once saw him trimming the weeds on the skirting while wearing coaches shorts and a wife-beater T.

eb73759d832853a2bae934b5a5903bca.jpg
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, BurntEyes said:

Likely this falls into a semantics discussion but I ask, what is a criminal justice system without morally right consequence and justice for the victims? Who are will killing in the name of? 

It does fall into semantics, but they are interesting semantics.  Maybe a helpful way to think about it is as a "tiebreaker."

In case X, the victims want to treat the accused a certain way.  Pick either extreme: the accused committed a violent assault (and it's evident that he's at risk of committing future assaults), so the family will not believe justice has been done until the accused is flayed alive (if you hurt one of my family members, I may well fall into this camp).  OR...same circumstance, but the family is super-peacenik, believe they have "looked into the accused's heart, and he's truly sorry," and they want all charges dropped.  NEITHER of those outcomes -- even though it is what the victims belief is necessary for "justice" -- is an acceptable outcome for society as a whole.  

Thus, if the desires of the victims and what is good and acceptable for society/the state are not in alignment....the interests of society/the state should prevail.  They are primary.

And yes, the devil is in the details.  Prosecutors, courts, etc. generally work to get to a point where those interests largely align.  But if they don't....the interests of society should prevail.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Pancho said:

 

This isn’t true.

 

If the victim was stabbed by a White kid named Conner or Ethan, this thread wouldn’t have nearly has many posts and definitely not 1000 replies in 15 days.

there is a murder trial ongoing locally of a high school stabbing of a hispanic kid by a white kid in the school bathroom with virtually 0 national coverage.  about a month ago a 14 year black girl stabbed to death another 14 year old girl at a Killeen middle school and hardly anybody knows about it.  

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Bill Brasky said:

there is a murder trial ongoing locally of a high school stabbing of a hispanic kid by a white kid in the school bathroom with virtually 0 national coverage.  about a month ago a 14 year black girl stabbed to death another 14 year old girl at a Killeen middle school and hardly anybody knows about it.  

There was one at Manor high not very long ago and the thread was just people making shitty, terrible, tasteless jokes about it. Not sure it even got past one page in length.

Edited by Pam Cummings
Posted
3 hours ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

Lots of whites and Asians named Anthony.  Even Hispanics use that name.  Remember Anthony Munoz 

Anthony is the family's last name.  The offender's first name is Karmelo.    You can make your own determination on why some folks are using Karmelo and Austin, and others are using Anthony and Metcalf. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Frank Drebin said:

Weren't you the idiot claiming a minority who hung himself was lynched in Houston?

Ahh yes, the one thins from years ago Sack just can’t seem to let go of and when he has nothing he brings it up to try and get a rise of the other radical right wingers in here. 

 

 

Posted
27 minutes ago, Bill Brasky said:

there is a murder trial ongoing locally of a high school stabbing of a hispanic kid by a white kid in the school bathroom with virtually 0 national coverage.  about a month ago a 14 year black girl stabbed to death another 14 year old girl at a Killeen middle school and hardly anybody knows about it.  

If You Say So Shrug GIF

Posted
39 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It does fall into semantics, but they are interesting semantics.  Maybe a helpful way to think about it is as a "tiebreaker."

In case X, the victims want to treat the accused a certain way.  Pick either extreme: the accused committed a violent assault (and it's evident that he's at risk of committing future assaults), so the family will not believe justice has been done until the accused is flayed alive (if you hurt one of my family members, I may well fall into this camp).  OR...same circumstance, but the family is super-peacenik, believe they have "looked into the accused's heart, and he's truly sorry," and they want all charges dropped.  NEITHER of those outcomes -- even though it is what the victims belief is necessary for "justice" -- is an acceptable outcome for society as a whole.  

Thus, if the desires of the victims and what is good and acceptable for society/the state are not in alignment....the interests of society/the state should prevail.  They are primary.

And yes, the devil is in the details.  Prosecutors, courts, etc. generally work to get to a point where those interests largely align.  But if they don't....the interests of society should prevail.

I can agree to what you've put forth, just important to me that the victim and his family aren't forgotten in all of this. To that end and to practice what I preach here is a snap shot from Austin Metcalf's X profile and his hudl link. (I blurred the phone and email because I think I should)

Screenshot_20250418_123240_Chrome.thumb.jpg.3093e233e6ea41fa3d23362b5120fb66.jpg

Austin Metcalf Hudl

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Pancho said:

 

Frisco was fine. In the late 90s, early 2000s, Frisco High was in the same district as Gainesville. We would routinely beat them in everything because, well, we had athletes and they had lanky white dudes. Well, my senior year (99-00), for the first time, Frisco High had Blacks on their team. We were Gainesville so we had Blacks always, granted we were a bit country, but we were still athletic nonetheless. It was also the first year they opened their new high school and had plans to build a 2nd. Goin to Frisco my Fresh, Soph, and Junior years compared to my Senior year was crazy nuts. It was like that city exploded overnight. 

Frisco attracted the White Flight folks from Dallas, Plano, Lewisville, The Colony, etc. And now, even Lewisville and Flower Mound, which used to be the “it” burbs of Dallas, are finding themselves playing second and third fiddle to Frisco, Prosper, Melissa, and Celina. Hell, even Little Elm started getting Blacks moving in there. 

Yes, there are a few of the old guard Whites still in Frisco, but nothing like it was before. That is why this incident was surprising to me. 

 

Well, that's kind of good to hear.  It's kind of amusing to me to hear of younger folks than I talking about white flight, not that it's not still a thing.

My parents moved to a great white ISD before segregation was a thing, before the Civil Rights Act, before busing, because my Dad's sister worked as a teacher at the high school during and after the war and told him it was the best school in Dallas.  And Dad attended SMU on the GI Bill, and lived at a relative's house near campus.  

I lived through busing riots in Boston and some lower-profile controversy in Dallas myself.  And I think that's what really commenced white flight and a lot of that was of the more purely racially motivated type, rather than the "best schools with homes I can afford type.".

One phenomenon that's bizarre to me is how Dallas and Houston, and I guess most (Southern?) cities, seem to abandon suburbs after about a generation or so, moving further out from the city center and leaving a formerly nice suburb to the poors, occasionally to regentrify.  None of them seem to become Tarrytowns or Windsor, NW Hills or Preston Hollow, or even Lakewood.

 

 

 

 

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.



×
×
  • Create New...