Cowboy Who?

The $147,000 miniature street sweeper purchased last year by the City of Houston broke down after a few uses and had to be sent back to the manufacturer for repairs. City workers now pre-clean bike lanes of heavy debris before using the machine.

The bill was passed out of committee 8-5. Two Republicans, Reps. Sam Harless of Spring and Justin Holland of Rockwall, voted with Democrats on the measure.

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

A reader writes:

I have a strange question for you. I’m a graduate student at a university in a large city where I also work evening shifts at the university library. The librarians all leave by 8 pm, leaving one or two student workers to close up the library for the evening at 11 pm. I’m a night owl, so this schedule suits me just fine and there are always enough students around that I feel comfortable walking back to my apartment after work.

My problem is with our night housekeeper, “Mary.” She comes in at 10 pm and stays to clean after everyone else has left. She’s a lovely person and does a great job, but … she is terrified to work alone because she thinks the library is haunted. I’ll be honest, the library is kind of creepy and I don’t enjoy shelving in the stacks after dark, but I just do what needs to be done and return to the circulation desk. Mary has begun to ask me to stay after my shift has ended to keep her company and, when I insist I need to leave, will come up with tasks that she needs my assistance with just so I don’t leave her to work alone.

I honestly don’t know how to respond. If she were fearing for her safety, I would suggest she call campus security to walk her to her car or patrol around the building more frequently, but the only thing she has mentioned being afraid of is the ghosts. I told her she needs to talk to the library manager or the head of housekeeping, but I think she’s embarrassed.

Obviously I don’t have any directives to keep Mary company or assuage her fears, but I feel badly. She needs the job (she’s a single mom who works another job during daytime hours) and I don’t want her to lose it, but I don’t want to spend extra hours sitting at my desk because of paranormal concerns. Any suggestions of how I can help while maintaining my boundaries?

You need to kindly say no and stick to it.

This isn’t like refusing a request to walk someone to their car or something else with a minimal demand on your time. This is someone asking you to stay hours late at your job after your shift is over. It sucks that Mary feels nervous being there alone, but it’s not reasonable for the solution to be that you stay late for hours to keep her company.

The easiest way to do it will be to be very matter-of-fact:

* “I can’t stay late anymore — I need to get home and take care of things there.”

* “Sorry, I can’t! I’m already late getting home.”

* “It’s late for me; I’ve got to get to bed.”

Really, anything you say will probably be fine as long as you say it confidently and stick to it. You don’t need to convince her to be okay with letting you leave; you just need to explain you need to leave and then go.

If it makes it easier for you, you can come up with some obligation that you need to be home for — your sister is staying with you and is waiting up, you’ve got a dog to walk, or whatever you’re comfortable saying.

If she comes up with tasks that she needs your help with as a way of keeping you there, it’s okay to say no to that too: “I really can’t, I’m already late leaving.”

Re-reading your letter, I get the sense you’re hoping there’s some other way you can help Mary. But ultimately, Mary has to figure out whether she’s willing to keep the job as it currently exists (meaning she’s going to be working alone in a building that apparently gives her the creeps) or whether she wants to see if it’s possible to adjust her hours or whatever other way she’d be comfortable handling this. That’s not something you can solve for her (if anything, you’re probably just helping her kick that question down the road) and it’s really okay for you to leave when your work is over.

Charles III was crowned King of the United Kingdom in Westminster Abbey on Saturday in his coronation ceremony, making him the oldest monarch ever to take the throne at 74 years old. What do you think?

Read more...

SEDGWICK, KS—Calling it the main driver of business, job creation, and tax revenue for the municipality, the mayor of Sedgwick, KS, told reporters Monday that the small town’s economy was wholly dependent on cars that made a wrong turn after getting off the interstate. “The number of families who were on their way to…

Read more...

If you learn anything after buying a house, it’s this: Water is your enemy. Every day, in a surprisingly wide variety of ways, water is infiltrating your house and trying to erode, rust, and wash away everything inside it, including you. That’s why the folks who built your house have taken steps to anticipate and deal…

Read more...

If you know someone who’s a fan of Louder With Crowder host and world-class husband Steven Crowder, here are the things you should never say to them.

Read more...

AUSTIN, TX—In an effort to streamline the job search process, employment website Indeed reportedly launched a new feature Monday allowing users to sort its listings by the amount of exploitation. “Finding the perfect career match has never been easier with new search filters from Indeed that allow you to sort jobs…

Read more...

“When asked by CNN to respond to critics who argue that ‘thoughts and prayers’ are not enough to prevent mass shootings, Republican Rep. Keith Self, who represents Allen [Texas], said … that he wanted to know what the motive of the gunman was and whether he had mental health issues.” — NBC News

I actually know what the shooter’s motive was.

It was to kill people.

Using a gun.

“The shooting came barely a week after a man fatally shot five people in Cleveland, Texas, after a neighbor asked him to stop firing his weapon while a baby slept. It also follows other rampages in recent days, including the fatal shootings of six victims in a home in Oklahoma City on Monday, and gunfire that killed one and injured four in a medical facility in Atlanta on Wednesday.” — NBC News

CLEVELAND, TEXAS: The shooter’s motive was to kill people using a gun.

OKLAHOMA CITY: The shooter’s motive was to kill people using a gun.

ATLANTA: The shooter’s motive was to kill people using a gun.

I’m not a cop, a star witness, an FBI agent, or a forensic psychologist. I’m not a clairvoyant, I’m bad at math, and I lie to my doctor about doing regular breast exams. But even I—an ordinary American citizen with soft morals and the ability to take in basic information and discern simple patterns—know what the motive was behind every mass shooting. Every single one.

THE MONTEREY PARK SHOOTING, 2023
11 dead, 9 injured

“Investigators have not … given a possible motive for the mass shooting.” — ABC7 Eyewitness News

The motive was to kill people using a semi-automatic handgun.

THE ROBB ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL SHOOTING, 2022
19 dead, 2 injured

“There’s still a lot to learn about the gunman in Uvalde, his motives, and what might have been done to stop him.” — Texas Tribune

The motive was to primarily kill very, very young people using a semi-automatic rifle.

THE BUFFALO
SUPERMARKET SHOOTING, 2022
10 dead, 3 injured

“‘Gendron’s motive for the mass shooting was to prevent Black people from replacing white people and eliminating the white race, and to inspire others to commit similar attacks,’ the complaint states.” — NBC News

In other words, the motive was to primarily kill Black people using a semi-automatic rifle.

THE BOULDER KING
SOOPERS STORE SHOOTING, 2021
10 dead, 1 injured

“Neither the defendant nor law enforcement officials have publicly provided a motive for the shooting.” — The Denver Post

The motive was to kill people using semi-automatic pistols.

THE EL PASO WALMART SHOOTING, 2019
22 dead, 24 injured

“Crusius, 21, wanted to stop a ‘Hispanic invasion of Texas,’ according to an online document police believe he wrote. ‘The 2,300-word’ manifesto,’ as police called it, was attached to a post that read: ‘I’m probably going to die today.’” — CNN

In other words, the motive was to primarily kill Latino people using a semi-automatic rifle, and I guess also to kill himself.

THE VIRGINIA BEACH SHOOTING, 2019
12 dead, 4 injured

“‘One of the pieces of the investigation will include the motive for this horrific act,’ Cervera said on Sunday. ‘We don’t have anything glaring, there’s nothing that hits you between the eyes.’” — BuzzFeed News

An incredible choice of words here. Nevertheless, the motive was to kill people using a .45-caliber semi-automatic handgun.

THE THOUSAND OAKS SHOOTING, 2018
12 dead, 18 injured

“‘We have no idea what the motive was at this point,’ Dean said Thursday afternoon.” — CNN

The motive was to kill people using a .45-caliber Glock 21 with an extended magazine.

THE PITTSBURGH
SYNAGOGUE SHOOTING, 2018
11 dead, 6 injured

“The killings also immediately reignited the longstanding national debate about guns: President Donald Trump said the outcome might have been different if the synagogue ‘had some kind of protection’ from an armed guard.” — AP News

The motive was to kill Jewish people using an assault-style rifle and three handguns. And the outcome might have been very different if the country weren’t awash in guns already.

THE SANTA FE, TEXAS,
HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTING, 2018
10 dead, 13 injured

“Police have not yet said what might have motivated the attack. … ‘He gave a statement admitting to shooting multiple people inside the Santa Fe High School with the intent on killing people,’ the police affidavit said.” — AP News

Seems like the police do know what might have motivated the attack. He wanted to primarily kill young people using a shotgun and a handgun.

THE PARKLAND
HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTING, 2018
17 dead, 17 injured

“Authorities offered no immediate details about a possible motive.” — AP News

The motive was to primarily kill young people using a semi-automatic rifle.

THE SUTHERLAND SPRINGS
CHURCH SHOOTING, 2017
26 dead, 22 injured

“The motive for the attack was unclear on Sunday, but the grisly nature of it could not have been clearer: Families gathered in pews, clutching Bibles and praying to the Lord, were murdered in cold blood on the spot.” — New York Times

The motive was to kill people using a semi-automatic rifle. “Almost all AR-15 variants legally sold in the United States fire only semiautomatically, and they were covered by the federal assault weapons ban that went into effect in 1994. Since the ban expired in 2004, the weapons have been legal to sell or possess in much of the United States, and sales of AR-15s have surged.”

THE LAS VEGAS SHOOTING, 2017
58 dead, 850+ injured

“FBI Finds No Motive in Las Vegas Shooting, Closes Investigation” — NPR

The motive was to kill as many people as humanly possible using semi-automatic rifles (some outfitted with bump stocks), a bolt-action rifle, and a revolver. “He had 47 firearms the day he opened fire on people.”

PULSE NIGHT CLUB SHOOTING, 2016
49 dead, 53 injured

“Disentangling Mateen’s motivations, at this point a major focus of the inquiry, is likely to be a complicated task.” — The Guardian

Is it complicated? The motive was to kill people using “an assault-type rifle called a Sig Sauer MCX … The MCX is described by its manufacturer as ‘the ultimate modern hunting rifle.’” The shooter also used a 9mm pistol.

THE SAN BERNARDINO SHOOTING, 2015
14 dead, 24 injured

“’We do not yet know the motive; we cannot rule anything out at this point,’ said David Bowdich, the assistant F.B.I. director in charge of the Los Angeles office.” — New York Times

The motive was to kill people using two .223-caliber assault rifles and two 9mm semi-automatic pistols.

THE WASHINGTON NAVY
YARD SHOOTING, 2013
12 dead, 3 injured

“Valerie Parlave, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office, said that Aaron Alexis, 34, began the shooting knowing he would be killed. A search of Alexis’s electronic devices, she said, indicated that he was ‘prepared to die during the attack and that he accepted death as the inevitable consequence of his actions.’” — Washington Post

The motive was to kill people using a semi-automatic pistol and shotgun, and I guess also to kill himself.

THE SANDY HOOK
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
SHOOTING, 2012
26 dead, 2 injured

“Police declined to speculate on a motive Friday evening, citing the ongoing investigation.” — CNN

The motive was to primarily kill very, very young people using a semi-automatic rifle, a bolt-action rifle, and a pistol.

THE AURORA THEATER SHOOTING, 2012
12 dead, 70 injured

“House Homeland Security Chairman Peter King (R-N.Y.) also said authorities needed to further investigate the shooter’s methods, motives, and associations. ‘I think the unanswered questions… is… what was the motive for this gunman?’ King said Friday afternoon on Fox News.” — Politico

The motive was to kill people using an AR-15 assault rifle, a shotgun, and a .40-caliber Glock.

THE FORT HOOD SHOOTING, 2009
(not to be confused with the other Fort Hood Shooting in 2014)
13 dead, 32 injured

“Days after a mass shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Killeen, Texas, details of the gunman’s life have captivated millions looking for motives behind Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s murderous rampage.” — ABC News

“Captivated millions”? What the hell, ABC? The motive was to kill people using a semi-automatic pistol.

THE BINGHAMTON SHOOTING, 2009
13 dead, 4 injured

“‘We have no idea what the motive is,’ Zikuski said.” — ABC News

The motive was to kill people.

People of every religion, every race, every gender, and every possible age.

People at work, people watching a movie, people praying, people shopping for a birthday cake, and kids shopping for shoes.

Kids at school, more kids at school, teenagers, and more teenagers at school.

The motive in a mass shooting is always to kill people. To kill them using a gun.

Or guns, plural.

So many guns.

It’s the guns.

It’s the motherfucking guns.

PASCO, WA—Identifying a single impediment to his future success, local man Greg Dempsey told reporters Monday that the only thing holding him back from achieving his full potential was his lack of a monkey sidekick. “There’s a world of opportunities out there that I would be able to take advantage of if only I had a…

Read more...

ALLEN, TX—In the hours following a violent rampage in Texas in which a lone attacker killed eight and injured seven, citizens living in the only country where this kind of mass killing routinely occurs reportedly concluded Monday that there was no way to prevent the massacre from taking place. “This was a terrible…

Read more...

Texas is among at least 11 states that have agreed to distribute fingerprinting kits sold by Kenny Hansmire’s Waco-based National Child Identification Program. Some are spending millions even though similar kits are available for free.

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. Our HR director issued an “it’s him or me” ultimatum

I work remote customer service for a small blue collar company and was recently also made executive assistant to the owner, Michael. We’ve known each other for years, so he has a tendency to talk to me about issues. Today he shared something that has me very concerned. The business has only been around for four years and has grown like crazy, as well as experienced its share of growing pains. A couple of years back we hired “Pam” to build an HR department from the ground up. She remains the sole HR representative. She has a lot of experience in the field and has been a life saver in many ways as we navigate the transition into a “real” company. We’re now up to 40+ employees with two not quite perfectly defined layers of management between a floor worker and the owner. Pam is apparently butting heads severely with a floor worker, “Toby.”

Toby has voiced concerns about Pam to her, as well as to Michael, and apparently also to other people on the floor, particularly new hires. He has started undermining some of her initiatives. The issue has lasted for several months, with both sides coming to Michael to complain. Today Pam gave Michael an ultimatum that it’s either her or Toby.

The problem is that Toby hasn’t done anything to warrant being let go and his complaints about Pam, according to Michael, are not groundless. Pam balances all her knowledge and experience with a difficult personality and a tendency to manipulate, take things personally, and play politics. In fact, I have seen a pattern like this before, where another employee seemed to butt heads with Pam and then was fired very unexpectedly. When Michael has tried to work with her to try and resolve Toby’s issues, she has “not budged.” So while Toby is starting to act out, it’s not without cause.

While Michael acknowledges that Pam is more in the wrong than Toby, he feels like he has no choice but to accept her ultimatum because “we can not afford to reboot HR right now.” Or at best, to go to Toby and tell him that his job is at stake if he can’t find a way to “get back on Pam’s good side” because he’d have to choose her over Toby.

As Michael was telling me about this, alarm bells were going off in my head, with all the letters you have posted about toxic workplaces with vindictive HR departments flashing through my mind. From what I know of Pam, this feels much more like a power play between her and Michael, rather than her and Toby. She is using the threat of quitting to get rid of Toby’s criticism and to get Michael to back off from trying to hold her accountable. It seems like caving would set the precedent that she can hold the company hostage. I personally think that the correct answer is for Michael to call her bluff. But I’m curious if you think maybe I’m being blinded by my own distrust of Pam? Or if you have any advice on how Michael can handle things because he’s definitely feeling like he’s stuck in a no-win situation.

You sound 100% right to me. If Michael thinks Pam is more in the wrong than Toby but fires Toby anyway, he’s creating a dynamic (and it sounds like may have already created a dynamic) where Pam isn’t accountable for anything she does, and she’ll know it. She can behave as problematically as she wants, and the consequences will only be for others, not for her. This would be unworkable in any circumstances, but it’s especially silly to allow it here just because she created all your HR at the start. That’s not an irreplaceable role — far from it! You can hire other HR people who can take over where she left off, and who presumably will be better at doing the work because they won’t come with her toxic approach.

“A difficult personality and a tendency to manipulate, take things personally, and play politics” are not things you want in an HR person, and frankly Michael should be thinking about replacing her regardless of the situation with Toby! Maybe those traits weren’t as disruptive when you were at a smaller size (although I doubt that) but if you’re growing into a bigger company, you really need someone professional and trustworthy heading your HR. Pam is not that.

Related:
my employee gave me an “it’s her or me” ultimatum

2. My boss won’t let me borrow against my future leave anymore

I work at a place where we accrue leave each pay period. Our handbook says that we can’t borrow against our leave (take unaccrued time off) without permission from our supervisor and our senior vice president. Recently, my boss wouldn’t let me take unaccrued time after previously granting these requests. We’ve had a bit of a dispute about it, and now they are not allowing me to take any leave at all until I’ve accrued enough time to cover it.

This policy has been fairly common at most places I’ve worked, but this is the first time I’ve ever had it invoked as a way to block my time off. If I had been told “this is a busy time” or “we’re short-staffed right now,” I would have understood, but this feels completely arbitrary. What should I do? I’m seriously considering getting a new job because of this, mainly because I’m 100% certain this policy isn’t being enforced consistently in our organization.

It’s pretty common not to allow people to take unaccrued leave at all; a lot of organizations make exceptions to that only for emergencies. It sounds like your employer isn’t one of them, but it also sounds like you’ve been doing it a lot, and it’s not inherently unreasonable for your manager to want some limits on that. Generally the thinking is that they’ve hired you on the assumption that you’ll be at work a certain percentage of the time, and if you’re repeatedly taking leave before you’ve accrued it, it can mean you’re not at work as much as they had planned around. Or the issue could be the liability it creates for them; if you leave before you’ve earned that leave back, it can be a headache to get it paid back.

If you’re 100% sure that other people have been allowed to take more unaccrued leave than you have (and under similar circumstances to your own; i.e., don’t compare you wanting it for vacation with someone needing it for a medical emergency) … well, different managers may have different outlooks on this. It sounds like your boss has been willing to grant some in the past, but no longer is. You can certainly decide you don’t want the job under those conditions, but it’s a very common restriction.

3. I don’t want my high performers to face resentment over their raises

We just went through our annual compensation cycle and with the current economic climate, we gave smaller raises than typical for our company (think 3% instead of 5%). We had several employees push back, and leadership decided to make a few changes for some mission critical employees, but are declining the rest of the requests. In total, about 1% of total staff are going to see a change to the original merit increase.

As a manager communicating both the denials and approvals to my team, I’m struggling with what to say to the people who are getting what they asked for. We very clearly state in our firm’s compensation philosophy that we encourage open dialogue around compensation, and I know my team talks about their salaries together. In this specific situation, I think someone talking about how they were one of the very few to get recognized might backfire on their relationship with their team. I am confident in the choices we made and if an employee comes to me with a complaint I feel I’m able to defend why we are saying no to them, but I don’t want my high performers to get singled out by their coworkers. Is there a good way to say, you’re free to talk about this but just know that you’re in the minority and your colleagues might not be that happy for you right now?

Tread really lightly here, because it’s easy for anything you say along those lines to be interpreted as you trying to squelch discussions about wages, which can violate the National Labor Relations Act. I do think you could say something like, “We had a number of requests to increase people’s raises this year. We declined almost all of them, but we’re increasing yours because (insert specifics about their work). You’re of course always welcome to discuss wages with coworkers, but that might be helpful context to have this year.”

I’m not even sure you should say that much though; this topic tends to be so sensitive that the potential for misinterpretation is high (and it only takes one person saying “Jane implied I should keep this a secret” to cause a lot of drama, so you definitely want to know your team with this one). The big thing is to be prepared to talk with anyone who’s disappointed about why their raise ended up where it did (which it sounds like you are).

4. Job interviewing in the middle of dental work

I’m currently in the midst of some extensive dental work and my teeth are pretty messed up right now. And I just found out I’m being transitioned out of my job due to changes in the company. When I’m interviewing, should I mention my dental situation is temporary or would that be more unprofessional?

When you’re self-conscious about something like this, I’m a fan of just naming it matter-of-factly. For example: “Please excuse my teeth, I’m right in the middle of some dental work.” It’s not that you should have to explain it — you don’t — but addressing it sounds likely to make you more comfortable so you’re not worried about what they’re thinking throughout the whole interview. Plus, naming things like this often will make people want to set you at ease and can make them less inclined to be judgy about it if there was a risk of that.

5. Contacting a coworker after they left unexpectedly

Around six months ago, my company hired a new operations VP. As the only woman in my department, I was excited to get to know her and learn from her impressive background and experience. We were able to meet one-on-one a few times and I got some valuable advice from her about corporate life and career growth.

Yesterday I saw a notification on our homepage that she has “left the company to pursue other interests.” No other information was given.

After I saw that, I added her on LinkedIn and she added me back. Would it be in poor taste to ask why she left? To be completely candid, I’m concerned that the company may be failing but leadership is not being transparent about our situation. If it is appropriate to ask, what language would you recommend? If it’s not appropriate, could you explain why?

With someone you’ve only met with a few times one-on-one, you probably don’t know her well enough to ask straight-out why she left, especially in an initial message; the risk is that you’ll seem like you’re demanding information that she might not care to share. (That’s not to say you can’t ask, “What are you doing now” or related questions — just that a head-on “why did you leave?” might feel like a bit much.) But you could get in touch, tell her what you appreciated about your meetings, ask what she’s doing now, and say you’d like to stay in touch. If she’s chatty/friendly in her response, you could then mention your own concerns. For example: “Between you and me, I’m concerned about XYZ at Org. If that’s something you saw too, I’d be so grateful for your perspective, especially as someone who left recently! Let me know if I can buy you coffee sometime, or even just jump on the phone if it’s a conversation you’re open to.”

New Cyanide and Happiness Comic

A motorist drove into a crowd that was waiting at a bus stop near a migrant shelter in Brownsville, according to authorities. "It is looking more and more like an intentional act," police said.

(Image credit: Michael Gonzalez/AP)

The driver has been detained, but authorities say it is unclear what caused the fatal crash at a Brownsville bus stop.

People need to realize that the unions for white collar people like WGA or SIEU or NEA (public sector unions are why cops who kill the people they were supposed to serve & protect remain employed get pensions) is not the AFL-CIO or any other historical union fighting for the lives of the people who built the country’s industry and made it run, any more than the NRA are the Minutemen of 1775 New England.

First, go fuck yourself, you fucking scab. No, seriously - you don’t come to my blog and spout off about what workers deserve unions and decent pay and what ones don’t, like it’s your fucking decision. The intellectual labor that writers perform is just as real as any other work done on a film set - “all who labor by hand or brain” is the inherent logic of industrial unionism for a reason.

Second, writers aren’t asking to get paid more than once: residuals are deferred pay, you absolute moron. In Hollywood, whether it’s writers or actors or voice talent or whatever, you get a small fraction up front - it’s usually an ok check, depending on the union’s day rates and so forth, but you can’t make a living off stitching these together - and then most of your pay comes from monthly royalty checks that provide you with the income you need to live off when you’re between jobs.

The problem is that, historically in Hollywood, residuals have been structured with a very long “tail” - the payments start out relatively low and then get more generous over time as the show has more seasons and (presumably) goes into syndication. This doesn’t work with streaming’s new business model, where increasingly shows are getting 2-3 seasons max and streaming services have become increasingly quick to not just cancel shows but yank them off their servers in order to avoid paying residuals.

So what WGA writers are fighting for is a system that ensures writers (but also actors and other creative workers, because the unions pattern bargain) get a fair share of the show’s revenue, even if the show is only given 2-3 seasons.

Third, the U.S labor movement would not exist today if it wasn’t for white collar workers and public sector workers. About half of the U.S labor movement - 7 million workers - is public sector, and those workers are overwhelmingly women of color, mostly working as either teachers or postal workers. Likewise, about half the U.S labor movement is made up of white collar workers, and we’re graduate students and adjuncts and lab researchers, teachers and social workers, administrators and IT departments.

I’m both public sector and white collar, and I’m a member of an NEA union. I’m an adjunct professor who earns $6,000 a course and it’s my job to get working adults with jobs and families who’ve never gone to college or who’ve been out of higher ed for a decade to graduate with a bachelor’s or a master’s. If you don’t think that’s real work, you’re free to research and write all the lectures and powerpoints, deliver those in an entertaining and educational fashion, answer a flood of questions from students who need help navigating academia, and then grade all the midterms and finals and research papers.

Click here to go see the bonus panel!

Hovertext:
Oddly enough, I feel this is one of those jokes that only makes *me* laugh.

Today's News:

If you want to hear me tell a weird science story...

Police in Allen, Texas, said the gunman was among dead after he was killed by a nearby officer. Three of the wounded victims are in critical condition.

(Image credit: LM Otero/AP)

The shooter was also killed by a police officer after he opened fire in Allen. Gov. Greg Abbott called the shooting “an unspeakable tragedy.”

null

According to TxDOT's resent presentation to the Houston-Galveston Area Council, its $9.7 billion plan to widen and reroute I-45 near and north of downtown includes a series of sub-projects in three overarching segments.

LONDON—Crashing through the stained glass window of Westminster Abbey in a desperate attempt to free himself, a panicked King Charles III was seen flailing wildly Saturday after getting his head stuck inside the coronation crown. “Help! Help! Get me out of this godforsaken crown this instant!” said the king, who tried…

Read more...

Read more...

LONDON—Saying the performance would add a dash of rock and roll to the regal procession, royal sources announced Saturday that King Charles’ coronation would also serve as the first gig for the garage band Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, had formed with several other neighborhood dads. “Before Prince William pays…

Read more...