Texas law professor calls for repeal ...

Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second Amendment

There are 12163 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: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4783 Jan 28, 2014
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Again......I am not a mind reader.
I'm sure you won't mind if we all call you sh!tstain.
Responsibility

Petaluma, CA

#4784 Jan 28, 2014
2ndAmRight wrote:
<quoted text>
An ARMED society is a POLITE society.
Guess that must be why we have such high gun deaths?

Guess that must be why the world laughs at our gun culture.

Double loll -with politeness

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#4785 Jan 28, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
He's your pal, AV.
Make sure you ask him about being a felon and carrying a firearm with his blessing.
More like the "blessing" of the men that framed the 2nd Amendment:

The REAL reasons the Right to Keep and Bear Arms was DEMANDED to be SECURED in the United States Constitution
http://gunshowonthenet.blogspot.com/2013/06/t...

Now we see what the REAL meaning of “shall not be infringed” entails. The REAL reason that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution was demanded. Was in FACT due to a perverse 'law' passed by the Massachusetts legislature. Which 'law' disarmed for three years those that had committed the high felonious crime of treason.

"We condemn, and with arms in our hands,--a resource which Freemen will never part with,--we oppose the claim and exercise of unconstitutional powers"--Journals of the Continental Congress, Dec. 6, 1775.

Too bad for cowardly traitors like you and your fellow demonrats, eh traitor-troll?

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#4786 Jan 28, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure you won't mind if we all call you sh!tstain.
OK, barefoot2626 will now be known as sh!tstain. No, we don't mind at all.
3 posts removed

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#4790 Jan 28, 2014
Responsibility wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess that must be why we have such high gun deaths?
Guess that must be why the world laughs at our gun culture.
Double loll -with politeness
I could care less about the rest of the socialized world. And the only reason we have the problems that we do today. Is because of the infringements perpetrated by the LIEberal demonrats. We didn't really have a problem until UNCONSTITUTIONAL 'gun control' came around.
2 posts removed

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#4793 Jan 28, 2014
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Martin had every right to stand his ground.... What he didn't have a right to do was attack someone just because......
.....just because the person was chasing him with a gun? And before you ask for proof that Martin knew Zimmerman was armed, seeing a gun isn't a neccessary requirement for him to be afraid.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#4794 Jan 28, 2014
buckwheat wrote:
<quoted text>How could he have feared an "armed" man without seeing the gun?
Let's get this straight: Zimmerman WAS armed, but Martin did NOT need to see the gun of the man chasing him in order to be afraid.
5 posts removed

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4800 Jan 28, 2014
2ndAmRight wrote:
<quoted text>
More like the "blessing" of the men that framed the 2nd Amendment:
The REAL reasons the Right to Keep and Bear Arms was
Why not spend some of the 16 hours a day you are here on Topix to work on your GED and learn something from people who are smarter than you- you know, ninth graders- about the US Constitution?

Maybe a couple classes in history... starting with there was no United States in 1619.
1 post removed
buckwheat

Tulsa, OK

#4802 Jan 28, 2014
Bob2bob too wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's get this straight: Zimmerman WAS armed, but Martin did NOT need to see the gun of the man chasing him in order to be afraid.
Let's get this straight. You said:

"Didn't Martin have a reasonable fear that he was going to be murdered by an ARMED maniac who was pursuing him?"

He didn't know Zimmerman was armed, so no, he wasn't afraid. If he were afraid, he wouldn't have ran up to Zimmerman and jumped on him. His racism caused his own death.
buckwheat

Tulsa, OK

#4803 Jan 28, 2014
GCDNW wrote:
<quoted text>
George was the one in fear of his life. Why did the little street thug attack George?
You answered your own question. He was a street thug. Tout court.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4804 Jan 28, 2014
GCDNW wrote:
<quoted text>
Too funny barefool, you pick certain states
I don't pick the states, GZZMMM, I post the list the FBI has.

Wipe your chin dear.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4805 Jan 28, 2014
GCDNW wrote:
The southern state's numbers are driven by their liberal progressive cities,
States make the laws, GZZZMMM, and when the state makes it easy to get and carry a deadly firearm everywhere you go, people end up dead because people who carry guns have small penises and they have to make up for the shortcomings with bluster.

More guns = more gun deaths.

Wipe your chin, dear.
1 post removed
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#4807 Jan 29, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
States make the laws, GZZZMMM, and when the state makes it easy to get and carry a deadly firearm everywhere you go, people end up dead because people who carry guns have small penises and they have to make up for the shortcomings with bluster.
More guns = more gun deaths.
Wipe your chin, dear.
What is wrong with a gun death when it happens in defense of ones own life? Police kill daily with guns to stop violent criminals who harm innocent citizens. States don't "make it easy to get or carry" ANY type of weapon. Weapons have been around since the first person picked up a rock. Governments DO infringe on peoples right to carry a means of defense. I have asked you this many times but here goes again. IF you don't like guns then provide an alternative. Surely with your infinite wisdom you can provide for innocent victims of violence some way to defend against attackers.

Also penis size is just a deflection on your part as many women also own and carry guns.
2 posts removed
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#4810 Jan 29, 2014
2ndAmrihgt wrote:
<quoted text>
mental giant that you are, have you heard of pepper spray, tear gas and stun guns? come out of your trailer park and join the 21st century....
ALL those are PROVEN to be ineffective at stopping attackers. Why do you think police still carry guns? By the way idiot, pepper spray and tear gas are the same thing. I doubt the criminal attacker bent on killing you is going to pick "pepper spray" as his first choice of weapons. We are not talking just "deter" a criminal but STOP the attack. When your life or the life of a loved one is on the line and in immediate danger then "pepper spray" is a pretty weak defense. Also it is slow to work (if at all) and only short lived. What about more than one attacker? When two or more attackers are present the stun gun is useless or against an attacker with just thick clothes. A jacket and sunglasses renders both these "defensive tools" useless.
4 posts removed

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4815 Jan 29, 2014
GCDNW wrote:
<quoted text>
What about Chicago? They have restrictive state legislation and local ordinances
Water in the bath tub.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4816 Jan 29, 2014
GCDNW wrote:
Wipe your mom's chin....
Need the pressure hose for your mother, GZZZMMM.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4817 Jan 29, 2014
Tray wrote:
<quoted text>What is wrong with a gun death when it happens in defense of ones own life? Police kill daily with guns to stop violent criminals who harm innocent citizens..
They don't.

And for the most part: when they do use deadly force, it is when someone is using deadly force on them.
1 post removed

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4819 Jan 29, 2014
GCDNW wrote:
If Zimmerman only had pepper spray,
If the pedophile had stayed and waited for the cops as he was told, he would have found the boy he killed had every right in the world to be exactly where he was at.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#4820 Jan 29, 2014
2ndAmRightisamoron wrote:
<quoted text>
really, inbred?.... so all the southern states must be dominated by gun free zones..... you high on your skid marks again?
The recently released FBI's crime statistics for 2012, once again show the American South dominating the list of states with the highest per capita homicide rates. Louisiana led the nation with a murder rate of 10.8 homicides per 100,000 population. Louisiana's Southern neighbor, Mississippi was second with a homicide rate of 7.4 per 100,000. Alabama (7.1), Michigan (7.0) and South Carolina (6.9) rounded out the top five most murderous U.S. states in 2012. Missouri (6.5), Tennessee (6.0), Georgia and Arkansas also ranked in the top ten states, with Georgia and Arkansas tying for 10th at 5.9 murders per 100,000.
We don't have a "gun" problem, we have a democrat party problem...

There are twenty states in the United States where the majority of firearms homicides,(7541 out of 12,765), occur. There are 96 major cities that make up the bulk of the populations of these states. The vast majority of those cities,(Seventy), have DemonRat mayors. Which include the TOP TEN with the greatest number of firearm homicides. The remainder have Republican mayors,(19), Independent,(6), and (1) of unknown party affiliation. There is also an openly avowed communist mayor in America. He is the mayor of Jackson, Miss., and ran under the DemonRat party affiliation.

We The People don't have a "gun" problem. We have a communist-demonrat-LIEberal problem. The numbers just do not lie.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#4821 Jan 29, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
They don't.
And for the most part: when they do use deadly force, it is when someone is using deadly force on them.
YES, traitor-troll, they DO:

Wednesday, December 25, 2013

Police Involved Shooting Statistics: A National One-Year Summary

In 2011, according to data I collected, police officers in the United States shot 1,146 people, killing 607....

- Jim Fisher True Crime

Take a hike, you filthy spreader of deception and outright lies.

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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Planned Parenthood seeks fed study of fetal tis... 7 min Dan 206
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 8 min HILLARY 2016 190,623
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 9 min John Galt 1,265,050
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 10 min positronium 337,003
News States' targets shift in final Obama climate ch... 12 min RustyS 8
News Higher minimum-wage proposals gain ground in Ne... 13 min barry 131
News Are illegal immigrants bringing 'tremendous' di... 24 min Prep-for-Dep 113
News Hillary Clinton is promising that all homes wil... 26 min Prep-for-Dep 155
News 5 things about Congress' fight over Planned Par... 29 min Billy Ringo 114
More from around the web