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 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 128

Thread: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

  1. #1
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,973

    Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    - Benjamin Franklin

    This is a quote that oft showed up during PATRIOT Act discussions. However, given the recent shootings and the rise of some calling for further gun regulation, I would pose the question in relation to gun control. The right to bear arms, being inherent within the Constitution, seems as if it would qualify as an "essential liberty". Is utilizing the quote or principle behind the quote of Benjamin Franklin fair and useful when talking about the issue of gun regulatoin, control, or bans? Is there a belief that there are some Constitutional Rights, like the 4th amendment, that are "more important" than others, like the 2nd, in terms of placing regulation that hinders the individuals liberty? How does this quote relate to those arguments?

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Some people say that only a complete wacko with no understanding of our Constitution would object to reasonable gun control laws.

    What needs to be said is only a complete wacko ignores how everyone isn't born with a silver tongue.

    We have gun laws so people who can't communicate well can defend themselves. If you say "No," and people still do what they want with you, then you can blow their heads off.

    Heck, you shouldn't even need to say "No." Silence is not consent.

  3. #3
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,658

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    gun control means many things

    laws designed to hassle honest people in the specious speculation that will somehow affect people already in violation of other laws only destroy liberty

    laws that punish misuse (read USE) of weapons are sound, ones that impede citizens from possessing or obtaining the same weapons our tax dollars supply civilian employees of the government have no merit

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    gun control means many things

    laws designed to hassle honest people in the specious speculation that will somehow affect people already in violation of other laws only destroy liberty

    laws that punish misuse (read USE) of weapons are sound, ones that impede citizens from possessing or obtaining the same weapons our tax dollars supply civilian employees of the government have no merit
    I'm not sure if this is a necessary statement.

    I agree with what you're saying, but the problem is there are lots of jerks out there who enjoy hassling others into humiliation. For example, there was a recent case in Texas where a sensitive person shot his neighbors for playing music too loudly. He got 40 years for that.

    The real problem is a deconstruction of discourse ethics. Guns allow people to not endure abuse of process.

  5. #5
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:49 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,840

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    There is no Constitutional right recognized by the Supreme Court to have any weapon you want to have. This discussion IS NOT about depriving anyone of their Second Amendments rights. It is about attempting to find out how the American people want to define what those rights are in actual practice.

    To portray this as anything else is to engage in hyperbolic over the top intellectual fraud.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  6. #6
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,973

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    There is no Constitutional right recognized by the Supreme Court to have any weapon you want to have.
    We're not talking about "Any weapon". If you'll note the specific question in this thread, this is about guns/firearm regulations and bans.

    U.S. Citizens as a whole don't "define" what a constitutional right protects.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Yea, haymarket's argument is backwards. The second amendment doesn't limit firearms ownership at all.

    In fact, one could argue the government supports citizens owning WMDs considering the usage of Letters of Marque during the Barbary Wars.

  8. #8
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    - Benjamin Franklin

    This is a quote that oft showed up during PATRIOT Act discussions. However, given the recent shootings and the rise of some calling for further gun regulation, I would pose the question in relation to gun control. The right to bear arms, being inherent within the Constitution, seems as if it would qualify as an "essential liberty". Is utilizing the quote or principle behind the quote of Benjamin Franklin fair and useful when talking about the issue of gun regulatoin, control, or bans? Is there a belief that there are some Constitutional Rights, like the 4th amendment, that are "more important" than others, like the 2nd, in terms of placing regulation that hinders the individuals liberty? How does this quote relate to those arguments?
    First off, I do not believe that any one right is “more important” than another. They are all a set of inalienable properties of being human and each carries with it an idealism of human decency, dignity and worth. You can argue that there are different time scales and dynamics which would occur if any specific right is removed. Perhaps if you banned guns, things would go to hell a bit slower than if you banned free speech. But ban either, and you end up in the same place. Once we start degrading any of our rights, it’s all over. Government will forever argue encroachment on some level and will continue to whittle away ALL our rights until we are nothing but slaves on the land our forefathers conquered.

    I think the quote you make here applies to all rights and is a general warning to us all. Abdicate you rights, and you will open the floodgates to your own enslavement. Which is true and will remain true for as long as we are free (well I suppose it would be true after we’re not free, but it’s a moot point then).
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #9
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    - Benjamin Franklin

    This is a quote that oft showed up during PATRIOT Act discussions. However, given the recent shootings and the rise of some calling for further gun regulation, I would pose the question in relation to gun control. The right to bear arms, being inherent within the Constitution, seems as if it would qualify as an "essential liberty". Is utilizing the quote or principle behind the quote of Benjamin Franklin fair and useful when talking about the issue of gun regulatoin, control, or bans? Is there a belief that there are some Constitutional Rights, like the 4th amendment, that are "more important" than others, like the 2nd, in terms of placing regulation that hinders the individuals liberty? How does this quote relate to those arguments?
    It's fair to use this quote, sure. However, the problem is that people don't know how to use it. I've seen this quote posted many times over the last few months, several times in debates I've been in, but whenever people post it, they don't defend it or explain why the person they're debating should accept it. They just post it, act like it speaks for itself and then go about their business. In fact, that's what people usually do for any quote or saying that they use - just decide that the argument is so self-evident that it doesn't need to be defended.

    When it comes to the gun control I favor, I don't think Ben's argument actually applies. To me, "essential liberty" is a pretty subjective term (which is one of the reasons posting the quote as if the argument is self-evident without any defense is nonsensical). When it comes to the Bill of Rights, I believe that one has given up Essential Liberty when they have either agreed to get rid of an entire right or agreed to put so many regulations on a right that it's nearly impossible to exercise it. I don't believe any of the regulations I support on guns do that, so the quote has no applicability to my own beliefs as far as I'm concerned.

    As far as some Constitutional Rights being more important than others relative to regulation, I would say the free speech is the most important, period, relative to that point and in general. When speech is regulated into oblivion, we're screwed.

  10. #10
    Light△Bender

    grip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ☚ ☛
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,224
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Gun Control: Liberty for Security

    I don't think what's causing the problem with criminal gun use has as much to do with the access to firearms as it does with a cultural imbalance with crime and violence. Could some of the current gun related deaths be mitigated with stricter controls, possibly but not as near as much as a switch from promoting vicious behavior in almost every form of entertainment.
    Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Page 1 of 13 12311 ... 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
  •