Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:14 PM
rdubwiley (518 posts)
8 replies, 2504 views
Libertarians are Wrong on Rights (Original post)
|Third Doctor||Jan 2013||#4|
Response to rdubwiley (Original post)
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:03 AM
AtheistCrusader (29,423 posts)
Not sure I agree with his line of logic. I agree that it is important that society have mechanisms to protect our rights. His argument boils down to a metaphysical question of what are rights at all.
You have a right to be free, yes? But we have mechanisms whereby your freedom can be abrogated by due process. (For instance, you murder someone, and are convicted and sentenced to a period of bondage for that crime)
But, do natural rights like freedom not exist, just because those mechanisms, at that place and at that time, fail to recognize those rights? A black man in America in 1840 had every right to be free, in Georgia, as I do today. Likely as not, that right was not recognized or protected by those social mechanisms, but I would argue he still had the right, his rights were being violated.
But where the An-Cap argument falls down, is the real world. No one has ever pointed me to a working society WITHOUT government or government-like social agencies that enumerate and actively protect our rights. Not a working, non-might-makes-right lord of the flies type thing.
Response to rdubwiley (Original post)
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:45 PM
JDPriestly (56,798 posts)
5. We have a natural right to our life.
It is from that right that our right to defend ourselves and others is derived.
The right to live precedes the right to defend your life. In order to have the right to defend your life, you have to be alive, therefore, the right to live is more essential than the right to defend your life.
The right to bear arms is derivative of the right to defend yourself.
But your right to bear arms and defend yourself has to be balanced with the rights that others have to live, to their lives.
The problem arises when the right of one person to bear arms endangers the even more fundamental right of another person to live.
Gun-owners will tell us that they are responsible, that they exercise their right to bear arms so as not to endanger anyone but rather to protect themselves and others.
Problem is that not all gun-owners are responsible, not all protect the lives of others. And it is virtually impossible to know in advance which gun-owner really is responsible and will not endanger anyone with his gun and which gun-owner is irresponsible or angry or insane and will endanger others.
So, we ask gun owners to tell us how we can protect their right to bear arms while protecting the lives of young children, the disabled, the mentally ill, the elderly and others who cannot at all times be armed.
Most people who don't bear arms don't want to live in a society in which armed guards are constantly present. Because having armed guards everywhere, say at the entrances of schools, is a threat not only to the lives of those who aren't carrying guns but also to other freedoms.
So, gun-owners, this is your problem. The solution of those who don't like guns and don't want to have them will be to penalize you if you have a gun. How are you going to stop all the wanton irrational gun violence? It's your problem.
You have to find a way to balance your right to own a gun with the rights of others to live without guns and in a truly free society without armed guards at every doorway and under every street lamp.
Response to JDPriestly (Reply #5)
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:37 AM
eight19 (1 post)
6. Re: 5. We have a natural right to our life.
I really like where you are going with this, and I created an account just to reply to you.
I fully support people's rights to own a gun, as well as someone's personal choice not to. I believe the problem is with people who are getting guns illegally. Most criminals are going to find a way to get one regardless of any laws, which is why they are criminals.. just as people are going to do drugs weather they are illegal or not.
The irrational gun violence comes from young adults (between the ages of 20 and 24) with bad parents and a bleak outlook on life. The homicide rate among young black males, particularly in the south, is astounding. According to the department of justice and fbi websites, most of these are drug or gang related.
So I believe the real question is, how do we eliminate drug and gang violence among young adults in mostly urban areas?
By removing guns from responsible owners, you remove their protection against these people, which will give all criminals a green light to break in to whatever home they wish, because they know the family is not protected by a firearm.
A few days ago on my local Atlanta news, there were 2 stories that caught my attention. One was about a woman who was home with her children and shot a man who broke in to the house. New story ended, and another started. A woman in her 50's was home alone, and 2 men break in. The woman grabs the phone, calls 911, and hides in the closet to wait for the police. The men find her and shoot her dead. The news anchor goes on to say how the woman did everything she was supposed to do, and it was so awful that those men decided to kill her anyway. My point is, when someone breaks in to your house with a gun, they more than likely intend to use it.
Gun ownership is about having protection when your life is in immanent danger, which is in turn protecting your natural right to life.
I would also like to add that 10,523 people died in fatal car crashes from drunk driving in 2010, which is about the same as people killed by a gun that year.
112,000 deaths per year are due to the obesity.
443,000 die annually from smoking.
Our priorities seem to be a little off, don't you think?
Response to JDPriestly (Reply #5)
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:30 AM
MattDaaamon (1 post)
8. Who really has the gun problem? Not the guy with the gun.
Your statement was well written but the problem is not the gun owners making 'most people who don't bear arms' threatened, because to them, that's not their problem. The problem is the warm and fuzzy crowd not understanding the need to protect themselves effectively from those who wish to do them harm.
Yes, it is a drag having to deal with evil, whether that's in the case of a mentally insane person shooting up a school, or a rapist, or whatever. It's also a drag to have car accidents, and drownings, and war. Guns in the hands of good people are a necessary to fight evil in our modern civilization. Anyone who says otherwise wouldn't feel the need to be protected by unarmed police or military. Evil persists when good people do nothing. You can use reason or force against a bad guy, but those are the only two options: reason or force.
Bad people snap. Good people snap. There is no predictor for the latter. Your best course of action is to have accountability and take responsibility in your personal safety, and better yet, those around you as well with the best means available. We can pretend we live in a civilized society where everyone is safe, but it would be ignorant and a fantasy to believe that.