It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by cavscout
BTW, you may be right about us bloodthirsty Americans after all. After what I have been through and the oaths I have sworn to that constitution I would have more than words for you had you uttered that remark to my face. Careful what you say if you ever meet an American in real life who isn’t from Rhode Island.
Originally posted by cavscout
Originally posted by Flyer
I have, the average IQ for Texans is 92 which means they are way below average and 40th out of 50 in this list.
www.mindfully.org...
That study is a known fake and has been debunked here on ATS, although I don’t know why I expected you to be able to figure out that an entire geographical area with tens of millions of people living in it cant have an AVERAGE IQ ABOVE AVERAGE.
In 2006, Texas had a gross state product of $1.09 trillion, the second highest in the U.S. after California, after recently surpassing New York state. Gross state product per capita as of 2005 was $42,975.
Texas has more Fortune 500 company headquarters (56) than any other state except New York, which has 57. This has been attributed to both the growth in population in Texas and the rise of oil prices in 2005, which resulted in the growth in revenues of many Texas oil drilling and processing companies.
In 2006, for the fifth year in a row, Texas was ranked as the number one state by export revenues. Texas exports for 2006 totaled $150.8 billion, which is $22.1 billion more than 2005 and represents a 17.2 percent increase. In 2002, the Port of Houston was 6th among the top sea ports in the world in terms of total cargo volume; Air Cargo World rated Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport as "the best air cargo airport in the world".
Wikipedia
The economy of Texas is a dominant force in the economy of the United States. One of the largest growing economies in the nation, [skip] Texas has an economy that is the second largest in the nation and the 15th largest in the world based on GDP (PPP) figures. As the largest exporter of goods in the United States, Texas currently grosses more than 100 billion dollars a year in trade with other nations.
Originally posted by cavscout
Wait, certainly not in Jolly Old England! Sure you weren’t in Texas at the time?
Originally posted by skibtz
And now we see your true colours.
You threaten me with physical violence
You are seriously nuts.
You wanna be careful. Me and my mates work at the security camera manufacturing plant. There are thousands of us due to so many cameras being put up.
Originally posted by citizen smith
Although had anyone else come along at the time of the mugging, they would have patiently queued to wait their turn to be mugged too
§ 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY.
(a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is
justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent, or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
Originally posted by skibtz
p.s. I have nothing but full respect and admiration for the brave friends and family We have lost for The Causes, your constitution included.
Originally posted by cavscout
And those camera rats would have called the cops, who would have shown up 20 minutes later armed with a stick.
Originally posted by IAmTetsuo
they probably would have arrested the victim and charged him with some totally bogus "racist" hate crime!
seeing as how the police are a "reactive" form, instead of an immediate one.