View Poll Results: In general, do you agee with the quote in the context of gun regulations/bans?

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    23 82.14%
  • No

    4 14.29%
  • Other

    1 3.57%
Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 128

Thread: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

  1. #91
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Well, I think you're starting from the notion that constitutional rights are absolute.
    You'd be incorrect. Natural Rights are only absolute in having them. The Rights in the Constitution, by and large, as simply natural rights that are made considered protected governmental rights by nature of the social contract this country is founded upon...namely the Constitution. Said social contract lays down a specific way the contract can be altered. To me, altering it outside of that fashion is a violation of the contract and is something that should be fought against.

    Rights can come into conflict with one another or with the practical necessities of keeping the country alive and well.
    At such times that Rights come into conflicts, one must look at whose particular action is violating the other individuals right.

    As part of the social contract the country is founded on, our rights end where another individuals begin. This is why it's perfectly fine for me to own a gun, but the moment I seek to use that gun to infringe upon another individuals rights, then I am in the wrong.

    But, regardless, some of them have to be more important than others because some of them are pre-requisites for the other.
    Disagree entirely. While they may be more important in terms of their affect on other rights, their over all importance from a constitutional and rights perspective are equal. It would be no less or more an atrocity for the government to revoke habeas corpus as it would be to revoke the right of assembly. Once you begin to deem a particular right as being unimportant and able to be countermanded in ways other than the constitutional process, all right's protected by the constitution become unimportant and hollow as any notion of protection based on the social contract goes entirely out the window.

  2. #92
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    How important an amendment is, or a clause in the constitution, or even a legal right given simply by law is entirely subjective. I do not own a gun nor do I plan to, so the second amendment is entirely unimportant to me personally.
    Perhaps I should specify that I'm speaking from a political and constitutional perspective, not an entirely self focused individualized one. Someone who never has a desire to speak negatively about the government and doesn't care about the ability to speak freely doesn't magically reduce the importance in my mind from an over arching constitutional and governmental level of the 1st amendment.

    Not to mention, even on the personal level, I go back to my previous arguments in terms of my own opinion on it. Even if I don't particularly have much use for an individual amendment of the constitution, once you deem one unimportant and able to be simply ignored or changed by the government at it's whim without following the Constitutional method, then you devalue all of them including the ones you do care about because they are no longer a firm foundation establishing a social contract declaring what the government is prohibited to do but rather hollow words that can be ignored on a whim by the government with no recourse on the part of the citizens.

  3. #93
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil
    But, regardless, some of them have to be more important than others because some of them are pre-requisites for the other.
    Disagree entirely. While they may be more important in terms of their affect on other rights, their over all importance from a constitutional and rights perspective are equal.
    He (he?) made a good point about due process though. Numerous other rights are denied via due process, so if due process is null and void, most of the others can become so as well. Due process is somewhat of a protector of numerous rights.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 07-24-12 at 01:17 AM.

  4. #94
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:39 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Perhaps I should specify that I'm speaking from a political and constitutional perspective, not an entirely self focused individualized one. Someone who never has a desire to speak negatively about the government and doesn't care about the ability to speak freely doesn't magically reduce the importance in my mind from an over arching constitutional and governmental level of the 1st amendment.

    Not to mention, even on the personal level, I go back to my previous arguments in terms of my own opinion on it. Even if I don't particularly have much use for an individual amendment of the constitution, once you deem one unimportant and able to be simply ignored or changed by the government at it's whim without following the Constitutional method, then you devalue all of them including the ones you do care about because they are no longer a firm foundation establishing a social contract declaring what the government is prohibited to do but rather hollow words that can be ignored on a whim by the government with no recourse on the part of the citizens.
    Rights from the constitution as a group are important. The value of one over the other is subjective. Their legal standing are all the same.

    Getting tired so that may not make complete sense, but I think there is an important disticntion in here if I explained it properly. If not will try again tomorrow.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  5. #95
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    He (he?) made a good point about due process though. Numerous other rights are denied via due process, so if due process is null and void, most of the others become so as well.
    Even without due process, if they are constitutional protected rights then by the constitution the government shouldn't be able to restrict it. If they restrict them, that is not an issue of due process, it's an issue of that particular right. Get rid of due process, and the government infringing on your free speech by locking you up for speaking is still a violation of your right to free speech. Back to my original point, if they're willing to violate one constitutional amendment (freedom of speech) then the existence of another amendment (due process) is irrelevant to it because they could just as easily then ignore that one.

    Which goes back to my point. Once you subjectively, from a legal and constitutional level, declare one constitutional amendment as unimportant and able to be infringed upon outside of the methods set out by the constitution, you essentially degrade all of them to an equal degree as you set down a precedent that the government can wantonly undermine and ignore the constitution as it see's fit.

  6. #96
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Rights from the constitution as a group are important. The value of one over the other is subjective. Their legal standing are all the same.
    I agree here. However, when one is talking about the governments ability to infringe upon an amendment through the means of the legal system, I no longer believe one is talking about their subjective individual value on the amendment and instead believe they're speaking about the legal standing of it.

    It makes perfect sense to me for someone to find one more important on a personal level. However, personal views don't dictate the law. So I agree with you, but it seems what Teamocil (love the name, just finished watching the series recently) was indicating was on a legal level, not a personal one.

  7. #97
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Even without due process, if they are constitutional protected rights then by the constitution the government shouldn't be able to restrict it. If they restrict them, that is not an issue of due process, it's an issue of that particular right. Get rid of due process, and the government infringing on your free speech by locking you up for speaking is still a violation of your right to free speech.
    Imprisonment is a restriction/denial of pretty much every overarching right except to life, so in the cases where a government does incarcerate you for its own secret reasons not subject to due process, it is a denial of multiple rights.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 07-24-12 at 01:46 AM.

  8. #98
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Rights are so basic that they don't in fact really change much with time. I have a right to life. You can't deny me my life. That is murder, and it has been against the law since a such thing as law existed. I have a right to property. If you take my property it is theft, and that has been lawless since well before the ten commandments, and likely since any such thing as law existed. Liberty. I have a right to that, though it hasn't always been a right because people across many civilizations used to own slaves, but I think we agree about that. We have other rights, such as religion, expression, arms, in this country anyway, which is something that Americans tend to be proud of. You on the other hand think they're all up for grabs, based on the whims of the attitudes du jour, is that right?
    Yeah I think you've more or less summarized our positions correctly. To be absolutely clear, I think rights are incredibly important. There are many rights I would give my life to protect. But, I think it is the willingness to do that that secured those rights for us. They were not just there by default, they are things that we decided were so important that we were willing to go to war with the British to secure them and we put them down as the top priority in the new government we formed. Some day, we will decide that new things have risen to that level of importance. Some things we're already on the way to, like the right to privacy, and others that haven't even occurred to us yet. For example, maybe some day our lives will become so intertwined with computers built into our bodies and whatnot that unrestricted access to the network will be seen as one of the most fundamental rights without which no other right really means much.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    You think North Koreans don't naturally have a right to free speech because their government doesn't allow them to speak freely. I think they do have a right to free speech but their government represses it, and that is contemptible but it doesn't change that they naturally have a right to it.
    I don't think rights are naturally occuring. I think they are concepts people come up with. Certainly I would prefer that North Koreans have a right to free speech, but in factual reality, they don't. That is a freedom they lack at present. There are many things that they could say which would land them in prison in no time. I don't think we can describe that situation as them having free speech.
    Total tax rates- People living in poverty: 16.2%. The median American: 27%. Working people who make over $140k/year: 31%. The top 1%: 30%. Super rich investors: around 15%. Help the democrats retake the house.

  9. #99
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    I don't think rights are naturally occuring.
    I disagree entirely with you here.
    Sans a society of any kind, I can say whatever I want.
    I can defend myself however I please.
    I can live.
    I can worship whoever I wish.
    I can be around whoever I wish.

    These things are inherent things I can simply do, not granted to be by any individual or society, but simply are. They the extent that I am able to do them myself.

    Now, individuals may attempt to stop me from doing those things. They may attempt to keep me from exercising those rights. But they can not take those rights away from me permanently, short of death. If someone caught me in the wild, kept me in a cage, and bound my mouth....if I somehow escaped and was on my own, I could still live where I want, eat what I want, say what I want, all up to the capacity that I myself can make it happen, because they can't actually remove those rights from my person. They are inherent.

    The problem is that, in nature, there is no notion that one's right's end where another's begin. I have a right to protect myself and to live somewhere. Another person has a right to eat and to live as well. That person may very well want to live where I live. He's well within his natural rights to take my land, and I'm well within my natural rights to defend myself and stop him from doing that.

    As such, we enter into societies through a social contract. There's two ways this typically happens. Either we as a people CHOOSE to enter it, or an individual/group has enough power to FORCE us to enter it. Once entered it, that social contract establishes how those individual natural rights are protected/restricted and potentially works to create other, governmental rights (which, unlike natural rights, are not inherent but dependent on the social contract).

    I can say what I want, worship who I want, live where I want, eat what I want, be around who I want in nature without the support or framework of any government. Those rights are inherent naturally.

  10. #100
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    I don't think rights are naturally occuring. I think they are concepts people come up with.
    That's like saying sex is not natural, it's just something people decide to do. Rights are things that are so inherent that it's a no brainer. They are natural in that there is a pervasive, deep, visceral, even instinctual sense of unfairness to think of someone being denied it by another's interference. These can essentially be boiled down to to life, liberty and property.

Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •