|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
TX: Police: 2 dead in suspected murder-suicide at Texas college
Submitted by:
jac
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
IRVING, Texas (AP) — Two people died Wednesday in an apparent murder-suicide at a Texas community college, prompting an active-shooter alert that instructed students and employees to barricade themselves in rooms. It was the second deadly attack on a Texas campus this week.
Submitters note: These incidents provide the answer to why would anyone need a gun on a college campus. It's because criminals, wackos and terrorists will still attack you on a college campus whether or not it is a victim disarmament zone. |
| Comment by:
mickey
(5/4/2017)
|
See?
It's all the fault of the NRA and the Republicans that she's dead.
If it was still illegal for him to have a gun on campus, he couldn't have murdered her like that because it would have been against the law...no, wait...ah, forget I mentioned it. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(5/4/2017)
|
| That is NOT an active shooter, since he is dead! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
