kylejack

Defend violence and mayhem  all you want. Good people wouldn't stand for it. I think we have better people here in Houston.

I take it you didn't hear the statements from Ron Johnson and others in the police that most of the troublemakers arrested were from out of town.

This really has nothing to do with race, but the DOJ and the feds were there from day 1 to make it about race, including FBI rats like Al Sharpton.  So yes, this kind of chaos can happen in Houston, we have plenty of race baiters here (remember Trayvon protesters blocking 288 traffic), and anywhere in America.  Your government will be working hard to make sure that it does.  So when you're all out in the streets stealing and rioting (because you can't help yourself, you're all victims), our militarized police in Houston will be brought in as our saviors, put in place martial law, and maybe kill some people, definitely attack people violently and indiscriminately. 

The 288 protest is precisely the example I cited earlier of police de-escalating a situation without the use of violence. The Ferguson police could take a lesson, and then maybe their town wouldn't have descended into chaos. Treat citizens like the enemy and they will become the enemy.

While police militarizing has seemingly gone over the top, when I see people rioting, looting and burning buildings I want to see the police use every means at their disposal to protect innocent business and property owners, which by the way I believe the police up there showed remarkable restraint in reacting to the violent perpetrators that are no better then terrorists.

 

The people in New York peacefully protesting the death of Eric Garner I have empathy for, I have none for the people of Ferguson.  

1. The abusive police response to peaceful protests created an unstable situation where looters and rioters prospered.

2. Your comment that you have no empathy for the people of Ferguson is a disgusting smear of many peaceful protesters who had nothing to do with rioting or looting.

I honestly have no beef with the police having a few military weapons. Because we really don't have civilian militia's anymore it kind of makes a little since for someone to have it in case of an emergency. On the other had you don't want them having to much because then you literally have a standing army in your own town or city which is very alarming!

For insurrection we have the National Guard. We don't need police armed like military.

If the people of Ferguson want justice I have one word of advice for them:

 

Vote.

Yes, that's why people are there helping people register to vote, an action which the Missouri RNC chair calls "disgusting".

Houston has certainly had its problems over time; granted, not as big as Birmingham, Watts, etc., but still they occurred.  I hit teh Googelz, and one of the very first hits was http://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/10563-infamous-riots-in-our-city/ , largely about the 1967 TSU riot.  Some contributors to that thread still post here.  I also found some materials on the Moody Park riot in 1978 here and here.  I was in grad school here at the time, and those two articles pretty closely follow my recollection, though they omit mention that Phil Archer and Jack Cato, Channel 2 guys at the time, both got stabbed; Cato quite seriously.

 

A huge difference is the contrast between HPD then and now.  I'm certainly not saying that the department is perfect now, but at least it's no longer being run by our very own local version of Bull Connor, nor has it been for quite some time.  What does disturb me, though, is the militarization and "bad azzing" of the force, even down to such subliminal things as black shirts and cars rather than blue.

And don't forget the riots that erupted after Houston Police assaulted a black soldier based out of Camp Logan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston_Riot_(1917)

But you're exactly right. We still have plenty of bad apples in HPD, but the difference now is that on an institutional level the officers clearly seem to be under orders to clean up their act and not escalate an encounter whenever possible.

Houston certainly has race problems, but not the same kind of police problems.

If you look at how the Mayor has handled mass protests, her methods have been far more effective than other cities. Other cities like Oakland tried to confront groups like Occupy rather than just manage them. Our Mayor told them they could stay in the park as long as they followed certain rules (no tents, for example). The group mostly fizzled out on its own here with very little violence or arrests. 

When Quanell X's group marched onto 288 and shut it down, the police managed to resolve it without resorting to violence. These cops are clearly under orders to work with these groups and resolve conflicts non-violently whenever possible.

When police resort to unnecessary violence (as in Occupy Oakland, Occupy New York, Ferguson, etc.) the people strengthen their resolve. 

N/t 

I thought we were talking about pedestrians. Maybe you could just start another thread about cyclist scofflaws to keep the discussion coherent.

The Amazing Atheist is a terrible human being.

Anyway, atheists do face discrimination both in the workplace and elsewhere, so that could be a good topic. 

I dunno, sounds pretty good... 60x80 screen still puts it near the very top of the IMAX range of screens.

They still offer pretzels, but they don't look too great. It was remodeled a few times, I seem to remember that in the not-too-distant past (2008), one was the main food counter and one was for desserts.

By the way, apparently the IMAX name is gone, all references now in-museum refer it to as the "Wortham Giant Screen".

" The 24-year old theatre recently upgraded from IMAX 70mm film projection to stunning 4K digital with advanced 3D technology. Images of unsurpassed size, clarity and impact, enhanced by a superb six-track sound system, are projected onto a giant 60’ x 80’ foot screen."

http://www.hmns.org/?option=com_content&id=44&Itemid=6

I actually drive at or below the posted speeds on most surface streets, and pay far more attention to my surroundings than most folks. I don't text or talk on my cell, either.

Good, thank you. Now if we could get even a majority of motorists to do the same.

Wow, I suppose I should be insulted to be equated to a staunch segregationist, but then I consider the source and laugh.

 

The literal definition doesn't apply here. Go read the statute and give yourself an education.

 

Look, I don't care how fast you go when you're out on an empty West Texas road, but when you're driving here in this city, please drive no more than the posted speed limit, especially on streets rather than highways. Your convenience is not more important than the safety of others.

OK, Mr. Pedant, I'll reword the sentence to satisfy your obsessive nature. "Drivers do not intentionally go around trying to kill pedestrians. If a pedestrian steps into a roadway within the distance it takes a vehicle to stop, the pedestrian runs a significant risk of being hit by the vehicle, with the attendant injuries that often occur in vehicle/pedestrian impacts. Pedestrians need to be aware of their surroundings, and look before stepping into the road, since some drivers exceed posted speed limits, or are otherwise not paying as much attention as they should. "

 

Well, I never said they did go around looking for pedestrians to hit, so seems to me you're at war with a straw man. Pedestrians don't go around looking for a car to be hit by either. People get hit when either the motorist or pedestrian are negligent, generally, NOT when someone does something dumb intentionally. And speeding, which most drivers do, endangers pedestrians.

Unless you are trying to argue that most drivers are looking for pedestrians to kill, it's a good analog for most situations. The variables are speed and visibility. If I am legally driving 30 miles an hour and a pedestrian steps out into the moving lane of traffic in less distance than I can stop in, the pedestrian is going to get hit unless there is room to swerve.

Once again, you've chosen to focus on one specific situation. Most people speed, so someone obeying the speed limit is not "most situations", which is what was being discussed. 

Motorists speed and as a result have less reaction time to avoid hitting people and vehicles.

Ever notice how places where there are many many pedestrians like around the downtown transit center there's only painted cross walks (faded but still visible) but around the skyline district downtown(where people are only really out around lunch time) the crosswalks all are paved with brick? Same TIRZ; but perhaps it speaks to the economic justice meted out to our lessor fortunate citizens.

But hey... What's the difference between faded white striping and rough hewn brick on driving behavior? Absolutely nothing I'm sure..

Yep. I live near a crosswalk on Dunlavy that doesn't have a stop sign at the intersection. Motorists are supposed to yield to pedestrians in a marked crosswalk, but you should see the children and elderly trying to cross there. The pedestrian is a target in this town, even when obeying the law.  

If a pedestrian steps out in front of a vehicle within the distance it takes for the vehicle to stop, the pedestrian is going to be hit. I cannot stop from 30mph in 10 feet, and neither can you. If a pedestrian steps in front of me, I will do everything within my power to avoid them. However, the laws of physics cannot be overridden, and the pedestrian loses almost every time.

He's talking about most situations, you're trying to hyperanalyze one specific situation. Most pedestrians aren't killed due to stepping out in front of a car that is 10 feet away, so it's not a good example of "most situations."

If you want to cross the road and there are no signals to the drivers that you might cross the road then you do so at your own peril.  It's really not that hard.  Remember "look both ways before you cross"?

 

Of course. 

And City government should be doing a much better job of installing crosswalks where people are likely to cross. 

Maybe you had good intentions, but not everyone does. Some speed through getting incorrect work done and then shrug and grin like a Cheshire cat, knowing that they're going to get away with an after-the-fact variance.

Yup. So, according to the data, 69% of the deaths were at non-intersections, and on the front, we have a few people jaywalking. Jaywalking is, of course, not a misdemeanor but can be penalized at a fine not more than $200. If we could prevent jaywalking (in which it is the pedestrian's fault), we could prevent nearly 70% of pedestrian/vehicular deaths! The question would be then, why is jaywalking more prominent in poorer areas?

Pedestrians share part of the blame for jaywalking. Sometimes infrastructure or the lack of is also to blame.

I would like to say that I don't think it's necessarily poorer areas, it's older areas. You see, older areas tend to be poorer, and in older areas, there's simply less pedestrian accommodations. Back when I went to Blinn College, I drove through areas that didn't have the hand/walk symbols, just a simple button to turn the light red (they were on a simple timer, and that led to abrupt stops and bad traffic jams). The curbs had a sharp drop-off which were not at all friendly to bicyclists and those with disabilities. The sidewalks were narrow. The City of Bryan has made efforts to fix it, but cities, especially larger ones, cannot fix all these problems instantly.

TIRZ tax zones mean that wealthy areas can afford to spend more on infrastructure. This is why Upper Kirby has nice sidewalks, fancy red phone booth decorations, smooth roads, etc.  Fifth Ward has a TIRZ too, but it has a lot less money, so the infra suffers as do the victims of traffic accidents.

best of luck to the folks at Gage, but that location sucks.  the greyhound and mcdonalds scare folks away.  perhaps when skyhouse and alliance are full, there will be a local crowd that can support a bar at that location.  

Proof is doing fine. Mongoose vs. Cobra and Leon's are doing fine. It's far enough away that the station isn't an issue.

There's a new bar/lounge that's opened up in the old barcadia spot across from the superblock. I never heard anything about it or saw remodeling crews, but they had their soft opening tonight. 60's themed with the place decked out in retro furniture and decorations.  It looks like a classy change to what Midtown is used to.

What's it called?

Yes, by a super reliable source.

Interesting. They're claiming gas leak.