Texas law professor calls for repeal ...

Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second Amendment

There are 12127 comments on the BizPacReview.com story from Nov 17, 2013, titled Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second Amendment. In it, BizPacReview.com reports that:

A professor at the Texas A&M University School of Law claims that the Second Amendment should be shelved and replaced with something else.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at BizPacReview.com.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#9168 May 22, 2014
Squach wrote:
Bush has been out of office for six years and you fools are blaming him for sh!t that happened yesterday!.
Nobody did that. Your Obama Derangement Syndrome prevents you from accurately perceiving reality.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#9169 May 22, 2014
What? Another Squash post disappeared?

LOL! Why can't conservatives be civil?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#9170 May 22, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
What? Another Squash post disappeared?
LOL! Why can't conservatives be civil?
You love doing that, don't ya Danny Boy? I'll post more, no worries....

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#9171 May 22, 2014
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>You love doing that, don't ya Danny Boy? I'll post more, no worries....
More of Squash's fevered imaginings.

You actually believe I have the power to delete posts, don't you? LOL!

Is there ANYTHING you believe that's not faith-based?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#9172 May 22, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL! I believe we established long, long ago that everything you believe about me has sprung entirely from your own fevered imagination and has nothing whatsoever to do with who I actually am or anything I've actually said.
BTW - I know you've posted in this thread since Monday. Where did they all go? LOL! Haters gonna hate, right?
LMAO!
No, what we established is that you have a distorted perception of reality and everything I know of you stems directly from your rhetoric here on these threads. Do try to pay attention, will ya? Take notes if you need to. You endorse sacrificing liberty to governmental control in the interest of that nonexistent socialist notion "the common good". The government isn't supposed to control the people in this country, the people are supposed to control the government.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#9173 May 22, 2014
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>No, what we established is that you have a distorted perception of reality and everything I know of you stems directly from your rhetoric here on these threads. Do try to pay attention, will ya? Take notes if you need to.
Sorry, repeating back to me my description of you doesn't count as legitimate debate.

Strike one.
Squach wrote:
You endorse sacrificing liberty to governmental control in the interest of that nonexistent socialist notion "the common good".
False. I have never said or implied anything remotely like that.

Strike two.
Squach wrote:
The government isn't supposed to control the people in this country, the people are supposed to control the government.
Yep. No argument there.

Did you think that statement is somehow a condemnation of something I've said?

LOL! Strike three.

AND HE'S OUTTA THERE!

LMAO!

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#9174 May 22, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, repeating back to me my description of you doesn't count as legitimate debate.
Strike one.
<quoted text>
False. I have never said or implied anything remotely like that.
Strike two.
<quoted text>
Yep. No argument there.
Did you think that statement is somehow a condemnation of something I've said?
LOL! Strike three.
AND HE'S OUTTA THERE!
LMAO!
The problem with your whole comment here is the fact that I described you accurately and you engaged in some Freudian projection. Like I said, we established a long time ago that you have a distorted perception of reality. Could have something to do with the fact that you're the first and only documented case DTMDS.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9176 May 22, 2014
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
Obama's Sneaky Way Of Cutting Veteran Benefits
Nope.

Wipe your chin, AnalButter.

KY stains...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9177 May 22, 2014
Squach wrote:
<The government isn't supposed to control the people in this country
Another tea bag mantra SQUISHY.

Why don't you get a job?

It would leave less time for all these complaints.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#9179 May 22, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Could you please share your definition of "liberalism?"
Classical Liberalism vs. Modern Liberalism and Modern Conservatism

Monday, September 08, 2008

by John C. Goodman

The Sociology of Modern Liberalism. Most liberals — at least mainstream liberals — believe you should be able to say anything you like (other than yelling fire in a crowded theater), no matter how much it offends and, for the most part, no matter how seditious. They also believe you should be able to publish almost anything as a matter of right. But they reject the idea of economic rights. They reject, for example, the notion of a right to freely sell one’s services in the labor market. The New York Times in particular supports minimum wage legislation that keeps people from working if they cannot produce at least $7.25 an hour.

Similarly, in the liberal view of the world, the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker have no fundamental right to enter their chosen professions and sell their goods to the public. The medieval guilds that Adam Smith criticized were in this view not violating any fundamental rights when they restricted entry, controlled prices and output and imposed other monopolistic constraints. The same principle applies to modern special interest legislation.

Liberals are not advocates of special interest legislation per se. But they are apologists for it in the sense they believe that economic regulations should be decided by democratic political institutions, not by court-enforced rights to freedom of contract. So if butchers, bakers and candlestick makers succeed in obtaining special interest favors from government at the expense of everyone else, that is a legitimate exercise of political power.

The New York Times believes that you have a right to engage in almost any sexual activity in the privacy of your own bedroom. But the Times does not believe you have a fundamental right to rent your bedroom (or any other room) to your sexual partner – or to anyone else for that matter. Indeed, the Times is fully supportive of the principle of government regulation of who can rent to whom, for how long, under what circumstances, and at what price.

The liberal’s view of rights is closely connected to the issue of trust. The editorial page of The New York Times does not trust government to read our mail or listen to our phone calls — even if the caller is talking to young Arab males behaving suspiciously. Yet the Times editorial writers are completely comfortable with having government control their retirement income, even though Social Security has been managed like a Ponzi scheme. They are also willing to cede control to government over their (and everyone else’s) health care, including the power to make rationing decisions about who lives and who dies!

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/classical-liberalism-...

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#9180 May 22, 2014
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>Classical Liberalism vs. Modern Liberalism and Modern Conservatism
Monday, September 08, 2008
by John C. Goodman
The Sociology of Modern Liberalism. Most liberals — at least mainstream liberals — believe you should be able to say anything you like (other than yelling fire in a crowded theater), no matter how much it offends and, for the most part, no matter how seditious. They also believe you should be able to publish almost anything as a matter of right. But they reject the idea of economic rights. They reject, for example, the notion of a right to freely sell one’s services in the labor market. The New York Times in particular supports minimum wage legislation that keeps people from working if they cannot produce at least $7.25 an hour.
Similarly, in the liberal view of the world, the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker have no fundamental right to enter their chosen professions and sell their goods to the public. The medieval guilds that Adam Smith criticized were in this view not violating any fundamental rights when they restricted entry, controlled prices and output and imposed other monopolistic constraints. The same principle applies to modern special interest legislation.
Liberals are not advocates of special interest legislation per se. But they are apologists for it in the sense they believe that economic regulations should be decided by democratic political institutions, not by court-enforced rights to freedom of contract. So if butchers, bakers and candlestick makers succeed in obtaining special interest favors from government at the expense of everyone else, that is a legitimate exercise of political power.
The New York Times believes that you have a right to engage in almost any sexual activity in the privacy of your own bedroom. But the Times does not believe you have a fundamental right to rent your bedroom (or any other room) to your sexual partner – or to anyone else for that matter. Indeed, the Times is fully supportive of the principle of government regulation of who can rent to whom, for how long, under what circumstances, and at what price.
The liberal’s view of rights is closely connected to the issue of trust. The editorial page of The New York Times does not trust government to read our mail or listen to our phone calls — even if the caller is talking to young Arab males behaving suspiciously. Yet the Times editorial writers are completely comfortable with having government control their retirement income, even though Social Security has been managed like a Ponzi scheme. They are also willing to cede control to government over their (and everyone else’s) health care, including the power to make rationing decisions about who lives and who dies!
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/classical-liberalism-...
Interesting.

No wonder your worldview is so warped.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#9181 May 22, 2014
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>The problem with your whole comment here is the fact that I described you accurately and you engaged in some Freudian projection. Like I said, we established a long time ago that you have a distorted perception of reality. Could have something to do with the fact that you're the first and only documented case DTMDS.
LOL!

Again - mindlessly parroting my words about you back to me doesn't constitute a legitimate argument. It's the annoying game of a elementary school child.

But that's about your speed, isn't it Squash?

LOL!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#9183 May 22, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting.
No wonder your worldview is so warped.
Not warped at all that is the Modern Liberal here in the US who's worldview is so warped and why Modern Liberals are considered Pseudo Liberals which are bigots.

Pseudoliberal

Pseudoliberals are people that say that they are Liberal but really aren't. In some rare cases, they are Conservatives in denial. Because Liberal ideas and being Liberal is a growing trend, people have become quick to adopt being Liberal without actually understanding what Liberalism is. A major characteristic of Pseudoliberalism is to support (Note: voting for and supporting are two different things, sometimes you have to pick the lesser of evils) conservative and socially right politicians and politics (Barack Obama is Right Wing in some respects). Sometimes, politicians will claim to be liberal, and try to side on the left when it comes to a few social matters (such as being pro same sex marriage). However, they will generally pass and support socially and economically right policies.

http://liberapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Pseudoliber...

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#9184 May 22, 2014
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>Not warped at all that is the Modern Liberal here in the US who's worldview is so warped and why Modern Liberals are considered Pseudo Liberals which are bigots.
Pseudoliberal
Pseudoliberals are people that say that they are Liberal but really aren't. In some rare cases, they are Conservatives in denial. Because Liberal ideas and being Liberal is a growing trend, people have become quick to adopt being Liberal without actually understanding what Liberalism is. A major characteristic of Pseudoliberalism is to support (Note: voting for and supporting are two different things, sometimes you have to pick the lesser of evils) conservative and socially right politicians and politics (Barack Obama is Right Wing in some respects). Sometimes, politicians will claim to be liberal, and try to side on the left when it comes to a few social matters (such as being pro same sex marriage). However, they will generally pass and support socially and economically right policies.
http://liberapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Pseudoliber...
You've certainly got the propaganda down pat.

Ever do any original thinking or do you just let others do it all for you?
spocko

Oakland, CA

#9185 May 22, 2014
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>It is the anti gun crowd who don't understand the 2nd amendment and ignore the fact that it was written specifically to RESTRICT GOVERNMENT. The second amendment does not give or grant the right to keep and bear arms, it recognizes it as a pre-existing basic right and restricts government from tampering with it. The first part of the second states "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State”, the reason for restricting the government. The second part of the amendment is the restriction "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” That's pretty clear language that is only difficult to understand if you're trying to undermine it. The purpose of people keeping and bearing arms is to have the capability of national and personal defense. It does not mandate membership in any militia as the SCOTUS has confirmed. The purpose of the 2nd amendment dictates the type of weapon. That purpose is for our citizens to be able to act as individual soldiers if the need arises. Therefore they are constitutionally guaranteed the right to be armed as well as the individual soldier of the current time. We aren't talking rocket launchers, grenades, and such. We're talking the individual soldier's shoulder and side arms. Plain and simple. There is no such thing as "a new reality" it’s the same reality that has existed since the dawn of time and the second amendment is as pertinent and necessary as the day it was written. If history has taught us nothing else, it has taught us that tyranny, betrayal, and war can happen anywhere at any time and usually when it’s least expected. Having at least minimum preparedness for the worst possible scenario isn’t paranoid…….it’s prudent.
Number of licensed firearms dealers in the US: 134,997

Number of grocery stores in the US: 37,053

Total spent by the NRA promoting guns:$232,000,000

Total spent promoting the prevention of gun violence:$2,900,000

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#9186 May 23, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!
Again - mindlessly parroting my words about you back to me doesn't constitute a legitimate argument. It's the annoying game of a elementary school child.
But that's about your speed, isn't it Squash?
LOL!
There's nothing mindless about it Fanny Boy, no matter how much you wish it so. I'm dead accurate in my assessment of you. You can repeat your lame mantra all you like and the fact remains that I call 'em as they are in the real world while you distort and project. Just ask any other individual who has disagreed with you and you will find the answer to be 100% unanimous, you're the annoying school child playing silly games. It's hilarious watching you constantly accusing others of doing exactly what you do. When it is pointed out, you start with your lame mantra of "you parrot my words". Well, if you didn't describe yourself so well in your condemnation of others, when they tell you about yourself it wouldn't sound so much like what you just said inaccurately about them. You do it to yourself Fanny Boy, don't blame me. You should try a little thing called objectivity. Try to overcome that debilitating case of DTMDS you're suffering and see the world clearly for a change. My speed? How would you have any idea what my speed is when you're light-years behind? Try again........

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#9187 May 23, 2014
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Number of licensed firearms dealers in the US: 134,997
Number of grocery stores in the US: 37,053
Total spent by the NRA promoting guns:$232,000,000
Total spent promoting the prevention of gun violence:$2,900,000
Yeah, ain't it a crying shame that anyone needs to spend that kind of money to defend an UNALIENABLE right and personal liberty from an enemy who erroneously call themselves Americans?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#9188 May 23, 2014
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>There's nothing mindless about it Fanny Boy, no matter how much you wish it so. I'm dead accurate in my assessment of you. You can repeat your lame mantra all you like and the fact remains that I call 'em as they are in the real world while you distort and project. Just ask any other individual who has disagreed with you and you will find the answer to be 100% unanimous, you're the annoying school child playing silly games. It's hilarious watching you constantly accusing others of doing exactly what you do. When it is pointed out, you start with your lame mantra of "you parrot my words". Well, if you didn't describe yourself so well in your condemnation of others, when they tell you about yourself it wouldn't sound so much like what you just said inaccurately about them. You do it to yourself Fanny Boy, don't blame me. You should try a little thing called objectivity. Try to overcome that debilitating case of DTMDS you're suffering and see the world clearly for a change. My speed? How would you have any idea what my speed is when you're light-years behind? Try again........
Blah, blah, blah

Why is it that every time I challenge you to back up your claims with evidence you resort to long-winded critiques of my personality? Why do you always flee from debating the issues every time I ask you to prove your assertions?

The only possible explanation is - that you CAN'T.

You just make things up that fit your extremist ideology without any proof that they're correct. You believe what you want to believe regardless of the facts of reality. And when I push for evidence, you resort to childish personal attacks.

Of course, that's what makes you a rightwinger - faith-based belief in your prejudices in the utter absence of supporting evidence and immediate regression to ugly personal attacks whenever challenged.

Just like always. Haters gonna hate, huh Squash? You just can't help yourself.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9189 May 23, 2014
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Not my fault they got something right.
They have lost EVERY SINGLE ELECTION since last year, honey.

AND THEY WON NOT A SINGLE PRIMARY THIS YEAR!

Hahahaahahahah!

They can't even get things right in the poor Republican party they infected!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9190 May 23, 2014
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>Nope, Wrong again AnalDiver and it you that needs to wipe the $eminal fluid from your chin that you didnt get down.
Gosh, AnalButter: you're the one with the belt buckle bruise between your eye brows and the tattoo on his azz saying "Enter Here!"

Why not trying to coming up with something new, Hon?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Aide of Florida lawmaker: Outspoken survivors o... 5 hr Pat Robertson s F... 2
Taurus 24/7 pro .45cal (May '06) 5 hr Colin 464
News Opinion: Anyone who believes the Second Amendme... (Dec '12) 5 hr Peace I Leave You 6
News CNN's Richard Quest Won't Believe Mass Shooting... 12 hr Get Out 2
News Cities and states take the lead on banning bump... 12 hr Get Out 322
News Lots of talk, little action in Congress after s... 18 hr 3 PC WHITE MEAT 115
News Murder By Congress Mon javawhey 3
More from around the web