Poll

Is the right to arm oneself a basic human right?

YES
NO
BAN CRIMINALS

Is the right to arm oneself a basic human right?

Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
In a dangerous world, is the right to arm oneself a basic human right? Would it not make sense that a man should be able to arm himself equally as well as those who would do him and his family harm, regardless if those people respect the law? Should there be limitations to how well someone can arm themselves? If the items being limited are already exceedingly simple, common and available, would this make any difference to those with no regard for the law?


chode | Member
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: chode
IP: Logged

65 posts
 
It is important for the proletariat to be armed


 
Verbatim
| Komm, süßer Tod
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

48,284 posts
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right

it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right

it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.


 
Verbatim
| Komm, süßer Tod
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

48,284 posts
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right

it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
you are now talking about the right to defend yourself, which is a different subject

the fact that we do not allow just anyone to drive has not hindered society in any way, imagine that
Last Edit: March 01, 2018, 12:54:53 PM by Verbatim


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,842 posts
 
This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right

it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
you are now talking about the right to defend yourself, which is a different subject
Defending yourself from those that are armed without being armed yourself almost certainly results in bodily harm or death.


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
In a dangerous world, is the right to arm oneself a basic human right? Would it not make sense that a man should be able to arm himself equally as well as those who would do him and his family harm, regardless if those people respect the law? Should there be limitations to how well someone can arm themselves? If the items being limited are already exceedingly simple, common and available, would this make any difference to those with no regard for the law?
I'd consider self defense a basic human right, but not the entitlement to a specific method of doing so. No, it doesn't make sense. Yes, there should be limitations. Yes, it would and does make a difference.
Care to elaborate on specifically what makes a difference? And how it doesn't make sense? So I can only defend myself in a specific way? Basic human rights conform to the law?
Last Edit: March 01, 2018, 12:57:28 PM by Chakas


 
Verbatim
| Komm, süßer Tod
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

48,284 posts
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right

it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
you are now talking about the right to defend yourself, which is a different subject
Defending yourself from those that are armed without being armed yourself almost certainly results in bodily harm or death.
still a better outcome than allowing any fucknut to carry a projectile weapon

it's pretty asinine to compare rocks to guns, by the way, or to assume that good and responsible people still wouldn't be armed (the same way good and responsible people drive cars)
Last Edit: March 01, 2018, 12:58:08 PM by Verbatim


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right

it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
you are now talking about the right to defend yourself, which is a different subject
Defending yourself from those that are armed without being armed yourself almost certainly results in bodily harm or death.
still a better outcome than allowing any fucknut to carry a projectile weapon

it's pretty asinine to compare rocks to guns, by the way
So you'd prefer rape and murder possibly with illegal projectile weapons so the perpetrators of such can't get their hands on them because they obey the law?


 
Verbatim
| Komm, süßer Tod
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

48,284 posts
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right

it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
you are now talking about the right to defend yourself, which is a different subject
Defending yourself from those that are armed without being armed yourself almost certainly results in bodily harm or death.
still a better outcome than allowing any fucknut to carry a projectile weapon

it's pretty asinine to compare rocks to guns, by the way
So you'd prefer rape and murder possibly with illegal projectile weapons so the perpetrators of such can't get their hands on them because they obey the law?
okay, don't be fucking stupid

my entire thesis (that i've stated repeatedly) is that owning guns is like driving cars, in that it's a privilege, not a right

that means you can still easily get your hands on weapons if you've jumped through the necessary hoops like a responsible adult, it's just not your godgiven right in the same exact way that driving isn't your god given right

and since millions of people still drive, millions of people would still own guns

just because something isn't a basic human right doesn't mean it's banned completely
Last Edit: March 01, 2018, 01:09:10 PM by Verbatim


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right

it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
you are now talking about the right to defend yourself, which is a different subject
Defending yourself from those that are armed without being armed yourself almost certainly results in bodily harm or death.
still a better outcome than allowing any fucknut to carry a projectile weapon

it's pretty asinine to compare rocks to guns, by the way
So you'd prefer rape and murder possibly with illegal projectile weapons so the perpetrators of such can't get their hands on them because they obey the law?
okay, don't be fucking stupid

my entire thesis (that i've stated repeatedly) is that owning guns is like driving cars, in that it's a privilege, not a right

that means you can still easily get your hands on weapons if you've jumped through the necessary hoops like a responsible adult, it's just not your godgiven right in the same exact way that driving isn't your god given right

and since millions of people still drive, millions of people would still own guns

just because something isn't a basic human right doesn't mean it's banned completely
Well alright. I can't change your opinion by arguing with you. You've made what you believe pretty clear. Have a nice day.


 
Verbatim
| Komm, süßer Tod
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

48,284 posts
i mean ultimately if i had a button that destroyed all guns and prevented anything similar from ever being created or used again, then i would press it instantly

in fact, i'd smash wayne lapierre's face against it

that's my ideal, no guns whatsoever, fuck you

never gonna happen though, so i have to try to discuss reality


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,842 posts
 
This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
In a dangerous world, is the right to arm oneself a basic human right? Would it not make sense that a man should be able to arm himself equally as well as those who would do him and his family harm, regardless if those people respect the law? Should there be limitations to how well someone can arm themselves? If the items being limited are already exceedingly simple, common and available, would this make any difference to those with no regard for the law?
I'd consider self defense a basic human right, but not the entitlement to a specific method of doing so. No, it doesn't make sense. Yes, there should be limitations. Yes, it would and does make a difference.
Care to elaborate on specifically what makes a difference? And how it doesn't make sense? So I can only defend myself in a specific way? Basic human rights conform to the law?
I was just going over your questions in order. It's gun regulations that can and do make a difference. I just made a post explaining this in the Serious thread. What you said doesn't make all that much sense because you're ignoring the fact that you'd also supply "the bad guys" with more and more ways of harming your family in a battle you can't win. And I didn't say anything about basic rights conforming to the law. I'm saying that I don't think think that owning guns is a basic human right.
I don't think adding regulations to devices that are already in the hands of criminals will affect them much at all, so not adding the regulations wouldn't make a difference either. The ability to arm oneself covers more than just guns in my mind.
EDIT: When I ask what regulations, I meant specific laws.
Last Edit: March 01, 2018, 01:21:30 PM by Chakas


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
i mean ultimately if i had a button that destroyed all guns and prevented anything similar from ever being created or used again, then i would press it instantly

in fact, i'd smash wayne lapierre's face against it

that's my ideal, no guns whatsoever, fuck you

never gonna happen though, so i have to try to discuss reality
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.


 
TB
| Hero of the Wild
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: TBlocks
IP: Logged

17,409 posts
#13
i mean ultimately if i had a button that destroyed all guns and prevented anything similar from ever being created or used again, then i would press it instantly

in fact, i'd smash wayne lapierre's face against it

that's my ideal, no guns whatsoever, fuck you

never gonna happen though, so i have to try to discuss reality
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.
Most people don't have the drive or knowledge to actually do that.

Instead they just go to the store and buy one.
Last Edit: March 01, 2018, 01:32:46 PM by TBlocks


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
i mean ultimately if i had a button that destroyed all guns and prevented anything similar from ever being created or used again, then i would press it instantly

in fact, i'd smash wayne lapierre's face against it

that's my ideal, no guns whatsoever, fuck you

never gonna happen though, so i have to try to discuss reality
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.
Most people don't have the drive or knowledge to actually do that.

Instead they just go to the store and buy one.
Yep. right after they wait a very long time, drop a lot of cash, and get probed by Uncle Sam.


 
Verbatim
| Komm, süßer Tod
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

48,284 posts
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.
i already agreed that it's impossible, i'm just describing how things would be in my perfect world

so when i tell you that there would still be millions of good people owning guns under stricter gun control policy and 2A repeal, you know it's coming from a person who would ultimately get rid of all guns if he had it his way

in other words, i'm not allowing my personal bias against guns affect how i view guns in the real world

we're never getting rid of guns, but that doesn't mean we can't limit public access to them
and limiting public access doesn't necessarily mean giving criminals more power, it's quite the opposite


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.
i already agreed that it's impossible, i'm just describing how things would be in my perfect world

so when i tell you that there would still be millions of good people owning guns under stricter gun control policy and 2A repeal, you know it's coming from a person who would ultimately get rid of all guns if he had it his way

in other words, i'm not allowing my personal bias against guns affect how i view guns in the real world

we're never getting rid of guns, but that doesn't mean we can't limit public access to them
and limiting public access doesn't necessarily mean giving criminals more power, it's quite the opposite
I feel regulation against certain firearms and features as a whole do little to nothing to limit criminals. At least not in this country. Background checks are cool. They make sense, but I believe the Constitution and Bill of Rights the most absolute law of the land and should not be violated.


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,842 posts
 
This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.


 
Verbatim
| Komm, süßer Tod
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

48,284 posts
I feel regulation against certain firearms and features as a whole do little to nothing to limit criminals. At least not in this country. Background checks are cool. They make sense, but I believe the Constitution and Bill of Rights the most absolute law of the land and should not be violated.
the fact that the constitution has been amended so many times should suggest to you how fallible and subject to change it really is


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,842 posts
 
This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
I feel regulation against certain firearms and features as a whole do little to nothing to limit criminals. At least not in this country. Background checks are cool. They make sense, but I believe the Constitution and Bill of Rights the most absolute law of the land and should not be violated.
the fact that the constitution has been amended so many times should suggest to you how fallible and subject to change it really is
Yes, but the Bill of Rights establishes the basic rights of the people. Rights are not something that can be amended. We are entitled by them by our own existence. The Bill of Rights only puts them into words and establishes them as law. No law is perfect, but what we have at its core is the best we have.


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
i mean ultimately if i had a button that destroyed all guns and prevented anything similar from ever being created or used again, then i would press it instantly

in fact, i'd smash wayne lapierre's face against it

that's my ideal, no guns whatsoever, fuck you

never gonna happen though, so i have to try to discuss reality
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.
"Easily".

>"viewers should not assume that these homemade firearms are easy to produce"
>"they remain quite sophisticated pieces of engineering and true craft-produced weapons"
>"they require considerably skill to replicate"
>"manufacturers must also obtain quantities of suitable ammunition"
>"criminals in the UK do not appear to have made any great use of them"

http://armamentresearch.com/pa-luty-9mm-submachine-guns/

Home-made firearms are at this point still a very poor argument against regulations.
The point I was trying to make that outlawing a mechanical concept is not possible. In that post I was not attacking regulations. I was only saying what I believed to be their limit.


FatherlyNick - fuck putin | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: FatherlyNick
PSN: FatherlyNick
Steam: FatherlyNick
ID: FatherlyNick
IP: Logged

9,092 posts
If you know, you know.
If owning a gun becomes a basic human right - then we REALLY fucked up as a people. Not saying that we didn't fuck up, but imagine education and water being followed by a fucking rifle? What would that say about the state of the planet?


 
Verbatim
| Komm, süßer Tod
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

48,284 posts
Rights are not something that can be amended. We are entitled by them by our own existence.
you see no danger or folly in allowing men who lived two and a half centuries ago tell you what your basic rights are


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
If owning a gun becomes a basic human right - then we REALLY fucked up as a people. Not saying that we didn't fuck up, but imagine education and water being followed by a fucking rifle? What would that say about the state of the planet?
Evil is real. Man is fallen. Weapons hold influence. When only one side has one, the other falls.


Chakas | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Chakas
IP: Logged

2,576 posts
I like hugs and making the world a better place. That and guns. Lots and lots of guns.
Rights are not something that can be amended. We are entitled by them by our own existence.
you see no danger or folly in allowing men who lived two and a half centuries ago tell you what your basic rights are
They did pretty well if you ask me. They didn't cover everything, but I'm glad what they did cover is law.


Genghis Khan | Heroic Unstoppable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Karjala takaisin
IP: Logged

2,059 posts
 
Yes. The government becomes your enemy when it denies your right to defend yourself.