• Sheriffs are forming "2nd Amendment sanctuaries" refusing to enforce gun control
    285 replies, posted
I mean if a right is something you were born with, then what does that say about complicated births that result in kids without say, their right arm? They have a right to that arm after all. It's wrong they don't have it. But something prevented it from happening. So how is it a right? Rights are a fabrication of humanity. They're one of the best things we've ever come up with, but that doesn't mean they're aren't as invented as a flatscreen TV.
Depends on where you go. But honestly, borders are a social construct anyway so that's all moot. Sure, I'm not contesting your right to make a firearm. Hell you could get really medieval and make yourself a crossbow, probably not too difficult if you've got the know-how. Firearms are a bit more complex, but I suppose nothing's impossible. Rights as a concept outlined in a constitution are a fabrication, sure. But as an abstract ability it's definetely not. Yeah, they have the right to that arm, and it's unfortunate they don't have one due to that complication. That's pretty much where that ends.
So you're saying humans do have a natural right to arms?
Sure, generally speaking. Nature, by default, grants us through our evolution and biology, 2 arms. Sometimes it slips up and that doesn't happen. That's unfair, but that's life.
Ever heard of a pipe shotgun? About $3 at any hardware store and a box of 12 gauge and you've got a gun.
So you're defining them in such a way as to be entirely devoid of value or meaning? So do they have that right, or not? If a right is something natural, provided to us by nature, surely, the argument stands that if nature deprived them of a right, then it's not actually a right? If you can recognize a "border" is a social construct, how do you fail to recognize rights as a social construct?
So then it's a privilege. Again, currency is involved. Make it without spending any money and using natural resources and we might be onto something. They have meaning in that we have them. It's a right, and it's unfortunate that they don't have one, but if that's where nature took it then that's where nature took it. No law above nature.
No, your definition of "rights" are flawed to their very core. It costs money to get a device that can go on the internet, and yet my freedom of speech rights can be infringed by ISPs and the legality of them doing so is being argued to no end in my country.
Bruhhh you posted a definition of right that includes entitlements granted by law. That's literally what the Bill of Rights is. What the fuck kind of hill is this to die on? Let it go, you were wrong about the definition of a right.
Alright dude. You go take your "natural rights" and go see how they work in countries, and places, and areas of the world where there is no law to uphold said rights, and you can let me know how that goes for you, okay? Otherwise, I'm pretty much done debating "naturalist rights 101" with someone who can't expand what so ever on how a natural right would, or does even function. Ideally, sure, I agree they should exist, but the reality of our world is that rights are inventions.
Mmh, no, your freedom of speech rights are not infringed by ISPs because you can still walk around and say them out loud. The moment the government directly penalizes you for speaking your mind you can come back to me. Yeah, legal entitlements. You're not entitled to a firearm. You have to buy one. You need the privilege to be able to afford one. It's a privilege to own a firearm.
The law says that I have a right to a firearm, IE I am legally entitled to possess firearms if I want to do so. I don't have to buy them, there are many other ways to obtain them.
I think you misunderstand - in countries like that, your rights are indeed inhibited. They are reduced by oppresive governments. I'm not contesting that. I'm not sure where you're getting this from. Governments can be and generally are inherently oppressive in that they reduce your natural rights.
Mmh, so no freedom of speech in books or media then either, right? https://www.aclu.org/issues/free-speech/internet-speech
No, the law says you have to right to own a firearm (which is in itself silly), but you would still be privileged in being able to own one. If it's given to you by another person you had that privilege of knowing someone who could afford to give you the gun, if you bought it yourself, well, there you go.
Look, rate me baby all you want, refuse to debate the issue all you want, repeat yourself all you want, I don't really care. The fact of the matter is, rights are not a part of nature. Nothing in nature grants you a right. You have so far, tried to persuade us that rights are naturalized by quoting a dictionary that said "A moral or legal entitlement to have or do something. with infinitive ‘she had every right to be angry’ ‘you're quite within your rights to ask for your money back’ mass noun ‘there is no right of appeal against the decision’ Without even apparently reading it. Nothing said here defines a natural right, or how it works. You so far have not defined how a natural right works, where it comes from, how it's defined, or really, even a single thing about a concept you seem very passionate about. I'm still waiting for you to define it.
RIGHTS are a social construct
@C O Y O T E You actually got a point other than "guns are evil" or are you just going to argue in circles about what "rights" are all week?
What is happening in this thread, I shouldn't have made it
can you just answer my question Coyote? It's simple, and you still haven't answered it. we've been doing this dance for a couple pages now, so how come you can't, or won't define a "Natural right"?
Ouch, I don't know what world you live in, but I know I never want to live in it.
As a human being you have the right to do whatever the hell you want, man. Speak what you want, build what you want, eat what you want, sleep wherever you want. Governments can oppress that freedom, but that's the gist of the rights we get as humans. It's sad that you define your freedom by what influencers, social media stars, celebreties, media companies and otherwise tell you. Despite all those factors I can still go out and yell upon the streets any thought that comes to my mind. My freedom of speech is no more and no less inhibited by the rejection of a social platform, just the same as it wouldn't be if I went into a restaurant and did the same thing. Is it censorship if you run into a bar and scream hateful things and get kicked out? Nah, man, that's just a consequence. People don't want that. Doesn't mean you don't have the right to do it. You do, as a human. As outlined on pen and paper, but not as an abstract. I'm tapping into the philosophy of what we as humans have the right to do inherently, maybe that's flying over your heads?
With what? Not guns, since I'm not allowed to own them.
Jesus Coyote this is some serious cognitive dissonance. Everything you have posted has only further convinced me that rights are a social construct, as if there was any question of that in the first place.
Where did I say you’re not allowed to own guns? I’ve said you don’t need them, and that gun ownership is not a right but rather a privilege. I never said you’re not allowed to own one.
So you're actually OK with gun ownership and all this song and dance is just because you don't know what a right is?
Not really. Did you read my last few posts? Rights on paper are a construct, but as an abstract they are not.
But... no? Humans and societies are what determines things like rights. It's not some external set-in-stone thing.
OK, so if I'm not in a professional situation and therefore not allowed to own a gun, and Joe Blow is trying to murder me, what then? Does Joe Blow have a Natural Right to take my life because he is Stronger? Also, I again contest that gun ownership is a right enjoyed by all American citizens, as outlined in the United States Bill of Rights, with the definition of "right" backed by "literally every dictionary."
Birds have the right to go build a nest wherever they want and frolick around with other birds. Monkeys can chill out in trees and chomp down on fruits all day. Ants do whatever ants do. They have these rights to do these things, it’s their natural state. Humans have these things too, man.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.