There Will Be Blood:
Heartbreaking work: These are just two of your stories I've read. Very seldom does an article move me to even wonder who wrote it "You Want a Piece of Me?" by Mike Giglio, April 30]. Your work is heartbreaking and lovely. You let readers see through your eyes what we work very hard to look away from on the way to work, the park, baseball games...What's more, you provide a bird's-eye view of the how and why that provokes the "what else can be done?" That doesn't sound easy or glamorous. Thank you.
Hippocratic hypocrisy: I found the article concerning the kid who was promised $10,000 for a kidney somewhat humorous. The humorous part was the doctors saying they don't feel that it is "right" for someone to "sell" a body part for money. I'm sure that they don't turn down the money for their part of the transfer. Now, if they provided their services for free, I'd feel better about them. Dr. Gaber believes that operating on a donor motivated by anything other than altruism would violate his Hippocratic oath. Give me a break. Why should he be the only one compensated?
On the Trail
Online readers comment on "Metro Cops Shoot Bystander Near Rice," Hair Balls blog, by Richard Connelly, May 5:
Richard the club kid: As a regular Metro rider in the Rice area for two years, I can tell you, the Metro bus and rail system has become a day shelter for the mentally ill and homeless of Houston. Richard, have you ever served as a police or military officer and carried a gun? Do you have any formal firearms training ? Have you ever used a gun to protect your life or a family member's? Are you folks at the Houston Press journalists or just a bunch of club kids playing newspaper? Men like you are perfectly willing to let others police your streets and fight your wars as long as you can write about cheeseburgers and the hot women at Club Whatever.
Justice done: This blog was written in the tone of an arrogant jackass. Justice was done today on the jogging trail. There will be no endless, million-dollar trials, no lawsuits against the police and no special funds for the homicidal maniac waving a knife, who was so crazed and violent that he pulled out taser darts and continued his rampage, no doubt convinced somewhere in the back of his degenerate mind that the media would see him as an anti-police hero. Justice has been done. It's still safe to jog around Rice. End of story.
Fact finding: Cops in Houston shoot and kill people a lot, and it's the newspapers' job to get facts. This is a snarky paper; get over it. Maybe if those Metro cops had better training, a man would be alive and a woman would not have been shot.
Hard decisions: I really think more people need to do a ride-along with an officer to see the type of day-to-day things they encounter, the crazy situations they get put into and how quickly something that seems so basic can go awry. It's not like Hollywood, where there's a well-orchestrated script to follow, everyone is all happy at the end of the day and people go home with a Band-Aid. Do a ride-along in one of the busiest beats in Houston (unless, of course, you're a felon, and then you won't qualify). It's free. Then maybe you'll realize that the decisions an officer has to make in a millisecond aren't so easy.
Bullshit! I happened upon the scene today during my daily run at Rice. I call bullshit on this guy having to die at the hands of this jerk-off Metro wannabe cop. I see homeless mental cases on that trail almost every day. This proves to me that these Metro meatheads lack the capacity to deal with everyday life in the big city.
Biased: First of all, the Metro cops haven't shot and killed anyone in 25 years. I think that is a pretty good track record, and characterizing them as anything but well-trained is disingenuous. The title of this blog (it is definitely not a news story, as Connelly has proven time and time again that he is a blogger, not a journalist; a journalist reports actual facts in an unbiased manner) is asinine. A title to an actual news story would have been "Metro Police Shoot and Kill Man Wielding Knife, Bystander Also Injured."
Let's withhold our judgment of the whole situation until we get some actual facts and not just the innuendo and political agenda of Connelly. Was the suspect holding a knife to the throat of a woman? Was he attacking her, and they shot him down? Was she in the wrong place at the wrong time? Were the Metro police reckless?
Nate the Snake
Give a Hoot
Online readers comment on "Local Dude's Lawsuit To Be A Hooters Waiter Ends With A Settlement," by Paul Knight, Hair Balls blog, May 1:
Crap: I love to hear that this is the kind of crap clogging up our court system and helping to make our judicial system a failure. If a company's entire marketing campaign and premise is based on hot chicks serving food, then obviously a man will always be unqualified and incapable of performing equally on the job. The company should have the right to hire the most qualified applicants. It's not really discrimination, since few companies can get away with this type of business model.
Here's hoping: That guy's lawyer is a POS. I can only hope some hairy guy gives him a lap dance the next time he goes to Rick's. Hooters has enough trouble without him. Its food is about the same quality as Burger King. Without the beer and women, they have no reason to exist.
Give the man a job: Please tell me the settlement is that he gets to work at Hooters. Seriously, can you imagine a guy serving food in plum smugglers, tights and a tank top? They'd either get lots of customers and great tips because of people like me who would go to Hooters just to see that, or he'd get punished for being a dumbass by people who a) think a guy working at Hooters is ridiculous, or b) think his lawsuit is ridiculous and would like to tell him in person.
Get the Weekly Newsletter
Our weekly feature stories, movie reviews, calendar picks and more - minus the newsprint and sent directly to your inbox.