The Right to Self Defense

Discussion in 'Legal' started by WrongHanded, Nov 22, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    3,311
    Ah yes. The Founding Fathers bashing. That didn't take long. Thomas Jefferson-the guy everyone loves to hate. Complete with a critique of the Declaration. How en vogue. I wonder, to what historical character will you apply today's woke moral standards next. THR needs a dislike button.
     
  2. MedWheeler

    MedWheeler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,094
    Location:
    SouthEastern FL
    Kleanbore writes:

    Yes, fortunately, Heller wasn't based on philosophy.
     
    The Last Outlaw likes this.
  3. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    8,645
    Location:
    Virginia
    The weak defend themselves on their own volition and not because some Supreme Being gave them the means to do so. After all, the same Supreme Being gave the fangs to their predators. Nature is evenhanded in that way.

    The point being, that rights are what we make of them. They are not handed down to us from on high. In every single instance, what we think of as "rights" were taken at great cost from reluctant rulers. (Who, incidentally, were claiming that God was on their side.)

    This is the weakness of the "inherent rights" argument regarding self defense. It's not an argument we should be relying on. Better to argue that the right to self defense was something that we achieved.
     
  4. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,045
    AlexanderA has brought this down from the mountain. Not everyone agrees.
     
    D.B. Cooper and Big Bore 44 like this.
  5. wiscoaster

    wiscoaster Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2019
    Messages:
    3,426
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Rights aren't invented. Rights aren't given. Rights exist. Your comment might be rephrased to say, "what we think of as rights were recognized and reclaimed at great cost from reluctant rulers...."
     
    DoubleMag, Big Bore 44 and danez71 like this.
  6. luzyfuerza

    luzyfuerza Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2005
    Messages:
    995
    Location:
    RKBA-Friendly Utah
    Although the statement I've quoted is incorrect in at least three ways, unlike your other posts here, it does address the topic of this thread.

    If you would like to have a reasonable discussion about what I think Heller is, then start a new thread and I'll be glad to participate there.
     
    danez71 likes this.
  7. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,717
    Location:
    CA,AZ,CA,TX
    That seems like double talk. How did they get their will to survive?


    Correct, because of out inherent Right to to life, liberty and volition of happiness.

    The laws of the jungle, as you said, works both ways. At times, the weak rise up eat the strong as they have an inherent right and will to survive just as they strong does.

    More back to topic, the preamble to the lays out the intent of the constitution and mentions common defense. It's illogical to think that common defense could be achieved with out including self defense to some degree.
     
    Big Bore 44 and wiscoaster like this.
  8. Elkins45

    Elkins45 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2009
    Messages:
    6,180
    Location:
    Northern KY
    If a right is “inalienable” or “God-given” then why does the state have the power to take it away? Take the loss of gun rights and physical freedom of someone convicted of a felony. Does the state trump God in this instance, because liberty is specifically named as an inalienable right in the DOI (though not the Constitution)?

    Some of you are dogpiling on AlexanderA without understanding his point. Words on paper describing the hardiness of a right are meaningless if circumstances are such that the right can only be exercised in a practical way.

    You may think God gave you a right, but in some cases you also need to ask him why he’s not letting you use it. Sometimes you have to pick up the hoe and weed your own garden.
     
  9. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,334
    Location:
    WNY
    What rights are inherent varies in the USA between periods in time and cultural changes. Rights vary between cultures and societies throughout the ages. There are about 1400 religions and quite a few deities that various people believe in. Which particular deity gave you the right to keep and bear arms? Of course, you think your deity is the 'real one'.

    AlexanderA makes reasonable points that rights are a societal construct and not fundamental laws of the universe such as the laws of physics or mathematical principles.

    It is not so long along that people of color were claimed not to be people or to even have rights as obviously supported by the popular religions of the USA.

    There is a debate that some moral behavioral principles are wired into us by evolution for prosurvival of the species. A simple example is why we think babies are cute. That is because their body proportions are programmed to evoke care of the young. Thus hurting babies is immoral - not that we haven't done that.

    Whenever we go down the road that God specifically gave you the right to have this or that gun, it becomes ludicrous. The idea of natural rights is just an offshoot of a faith based belief. Nature? Does the baby turtle have the right to be cared for by its mother? They are not.

    Unless one can make a case for a 'right' bettering the interests of society or a specific segment of society with the ability to have that right implemented, it is not 'right' that will be instantiated. Just saying, you have a God given right might help Wayne get a check but it won't convince people opposed to gun rights.
     
  10. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    8,645
    Location:
    Virginia
    No "right" exists in a vacuum. (And that especially applies to the right of self defense.) In a State of Nature, might makes right. Your remedy is to become mightier than your oppressor. And that, in a nutshell, is why we have guns and lawyers.
    Whoa. Jefferson was playing with words here. In the original draft of the Declaration, the wording was "life, liberty, and property." "Property" was changed to the meaningless "pursuit of happiness" because some of the antislavery Founders pointed out that much "property" was held in the form of slaves. Never mind that "liberty" was left in despite Jefferson's ownership of hundreds of slaves. The whole document is a monument to hypocrisy (despite being useful in the historical moment). I'm not saying that Jefferson wasn't a genius. Quite the contrary, but he did have to overcome some "cognitive dissonance."
     
    alsaqr, roscoe, Frank Ettin and 2 others like this.
  11. bdickens

    bdickens Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,143
    Location:
    Hockley , TX
    I think "God-Given" is a term of art meant to convey the idea that these rights are universal and that they precede the institutions charged with protecting them.

    Some of y'all take things too literally.

     
    armydog and wiscoaster like this.
  12. MEHavey

    MEHavey Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2010
    Messages:
    4,030
    Location:
    virginia
    There is no such thing as a "right"
    There is only what can be taken, or defended.

    Since the beginning of man...
    Ignore at your peril.

    .
     
  13. aarondhgraham

    aarondhgraham Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,269
    Location:
    Stillwater, Oklahoma
    Stand Your Ground laws and Castle Defense laws come to my mind.

    States like California (back in the 80-90's),,,
    Was a state that required you to flee if you were able.

    My MIL almost got caught in that web of absolute ridiculousness,,,
    She beat a burglar with a lamp maiming him severely.

    The DA charged her saying she could have escaped into her bathroom.

    Fortunately she could afford a lawyer who argued her defense,,,
    The DA eventually dropped all charges.

    One of the many many many things that got me to leave California.

    Aarond

    .
     
    Roknstevo, DoubleMag and BryanDavis like this.
  14. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    12,534
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    In the Legal Forum we discuss what the law is and how it works. A philosophical discussion of the source of rights doesn’t further that purpose and is off topic.
     
    DoubleMag likes this.
  15. Carl N. Brown

    Carl N. Brown Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    9,943
    Location:
    Kingsport Tennessee
    The Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide

    ATF Publication 5300.4 atf-p-5300-4.pdf 243 pages

    THE GUN CONTROL ACT OF 1968

    TITLE 18, UNITED STATE CODE, CHAPTER 44

    TITLE I : STATE FIREARMS CONTROL ASSISTANCE

    PURPOSE

    Sec. 101. The Congress hereby declares that the purpose of this title is to provide support to Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials in their fight against crime and violence, and it is not the purpose of this title to place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, or use of firearms appropriate to the purpose of hunting, trapshooting, target shooting, personal protection, or any other lawful activity, and that this title is not intended to discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, or provide for the imposition by Federal regulations of any procedures or requirements other than those reasonably necessary to implement and effectuate the provisions of this title.


    Supposedly Congress recognized "personal protection" as a "lawful activity" involving "the acquisition, possession, or use of firearms".
     
    wiscoaster likes this.
  16. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    12,534
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    Note that the syllabus to a U. S. Supreme Court opinion is not considered part of the opinion:
    It should not be cited as authority.
     
  17. wiscoaster

    wiscoaster Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2019
    Messages:
    3,426
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Ditto. :thumbup:
     
  18. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,045
    It was a declaration of independence. It gained its "standing", in effect, through success on the battlefield and the treaty of Paris--that which it demanded was granted.

    The Founders were merchants, bankers, surveyors, tradesmen, farmers, soldiers, attorneys, and many other things. From being Subjects of the King, they became free men. They formulated and ratified the Constitution n of the United States--which, as the Supreme Law of the Land, does have legal standing.
     
  19. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    12,534
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    More off topic posts have been deleted. We’re done.
     
    DoubleMag likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice