View Poll Results: Which right holds sway?

Voters
79. You may not vote on this poll
  • 2nd Amendment

    17 21.52%
  • Property Rights

    62 78.48%
Page 51 of 54 FirstFirst ... 414950515253 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 538

Thread: Which right holds sway?

  1. #501
    Guru
    celticwar17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:30 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,887

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Is property of a corporation private property?

  2. #502
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    The difference here being that not all privately owned businesses actually ban guns.
    Not all citizens carry a gun. Your point?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    I have noticed that on several occasions you have used a link to Handgunlaw.us Which I assume that you are in agreement with their advice otherwise why else would you repeatably link us to their us.
    You assume to much.

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    To avoid over reaching laws that the NRA has been pivotal in getting enacted a business owner only needs to wish you to leave the property, they need not give a reason why. If they did mention a gun in the state of Florida then the legal CCW gun owner could file a civil suit. But none the less by law when asked to leave you must leave or you will be charged with a crime which would be a separate case from the civil suit. The gun owner could possibly (in Florida) win the civil suit but not the criminal case. You might be offered a plea deal though where you could avoid being convicted in a criminal case and possibly jeopardizing your CCW permit next time around. In other words you may have the legal right but not be able to enjoy that legal right to its fullest because of the fact that current concealed weapons laws require the permittee to qualify for their 2nd Amendment rights. These qualifications are the handy work of the NRA. The idea of qualifications makes one wonder how a Constitutional right needs qualifications? Do we need qualifications for the right to free speech? How about other Constitutional rights, should they only be allowed with certain qualifications? How can a Constitutional right require a test?
    Wow, what a load of bull****.

  3. #503
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by celticwar17 View Post
    Is property of a corporation private property?
    Try Google.

  4. #504
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,040

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Not all citizens carry a gun. Your point?
    Try reading the rest of the paragraph......

    My point though is that property owners should maintain historical Constitutional rights, that those rights should not be abridged by new over reaching laws. That the 2nd Amendment already serves the purpose of protecting our right to own and bear arms making additional laws pointless and in effect weakens the powers of the 2nd Amendment.

    You assume to much.
    So you do not agree with your main source of reference in this debate?


    Wow, what a load of bull****.
    Nice debating skills, you do know how to debate right?

    I think it is very relevant to this debate that the site that you keep running to as a reference is saying the exactly the same thing that I have been saying from the beginning.

    "As responsible gun owners and upholders of the 2nd Amendment we should also honor the rights of property owners to control their own property even if we disagree with them.

    If you are in a place not specifically mentioned in the law that is posted and they ask you to leave, you must leave. If you refuse to leave then you are breaking the law and can be charged. Even if the property is not posted and you are asked to leave you must leave."

  5. #505
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    Try reading the rest of the paragraph.
    I read your entire post. Don't assume that your words weren't read just because they weren't quoted and/or were ignored.

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    So you do not agree with your main source of reference in this debate?
    I don't agree with their opinion on the issue, no. They're still a great hub of legal information, though, providing accurate quotes and links directly to the actual state laws they cover. I'm a life NRA member, that doesn't mean I agree with the NRA's opinion of disarming when a private owner wants, even where there's no legal need to comply. Within pro-2A, opinions can very greatly.

    I'm not going to buy 'no-gun = no-money' cards and hand them to businesses with gun-buster signs. My thoughts on those cards is 1. a person with a gun can't give the card to the owner because the person with the gun isn't supposed to enter the property in the first place...so if you're going to enter the property with the gun then save the card and just do your shopping; 2. if you're going to disarm so as to deliver a card to the owner, then since you're disarming anyway just save the card and do your shopping.

    I don't recognize a business owner's authority to ban my firearm from my person just because they feel like it. I carry regardless.
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    If you are in a place not specifically mentioned in the law that is posted and they ask you to leave, you must leave. If you refuse to leave then you are breaking the law and can be charged. Even if the property is not posted and you are asked to leave you must leave."
    Everyone already knows this. Constantly restating it changes nothing I've said. I carry regardless. If I'm caught then it's my fault for not concealing correctly.

  6. #506
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    396

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    I'd like to approach this question by describing difference between 'inalienable rights' and 'civil rights'.

    An inalienable right is a right that is inherent to life. The right to live, etc.

    A civil right is to "ensure a citizen's ability to fully participate in the civil and political life of the state" (per wiki).

    When you enter into private property, you're exiting public 'civilization' and entering a private civilization. Therefore, you are giving up your civil rights, as defined by the government.

    Inalienable rights cannot ever be given up, as they are inherent to life. So you maintain your inalienable rights while on my property.

    So the question is: Are gun-laws inalienable? Or are the civil?

    I would argue that gun rights are Civil rights. If they were in alienable, it would be the responsibility of society to be sure all people had guns. However, because it is a civil right, we simply allow people to have guns.

    Ergo, you give up your right to possess a gun, a civil right, by entering my private property

  7. #507
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertzz View Post
    I'd like to approach this question by describing difference between 'inalienable rights' and 'civil rights'.

    An inalienable right is a right that is inherent to life. The right to live, etc.

    A civil right is to "ensure a citizen's ability to fully participate in the civil and political life of the state" (per wiki).

    When you enter into private property, you're exiting public 'civilization' and entering a private civilization. Therefore, you are giving up your civil rights, as defined by the government.

    Inalienable rights cannot ever be given up, as they are inherent to life. So you maintain your inalienable rights while on my property.

    So the question is: Are gun-laws inalienable? Or are the civil?

    I would argue that gun rights are Civil rights. If they were in alienable, it would be the responsibility of society to be sure all people had guns. However, because it is a civil right, we simply allow people to have guns.

    Ergo, you give up your right to possess a gun, a civil right, by entering my private property
    The right to self defence is inalienable. Your argument is invalid.

  8. #508
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    396

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    I agree with your premise that self-defense is inalienable. I don't immediately follow the logic of how that invalidates my argument.

    But after some thought, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I see what you're trying to say: that our right to have the ability to defend ourselves with lethal force is inalienable. (A subtle difference, but an important one I think... here's why: )

    Again, I would suggest that if this is the case, and it is true that inalienable rights are inherent to being alive, that you have that right simply by living, then we as a society have a responsibility to arm our citizens. Because we do not do this, this right to defend yourself with lethal force is a civil right, not an inalienable right.

  9. #509
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,040

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    The right to self defence is inalienable. Your argument is invalid.
    Did you know that we have an inalienable right to protect our private property?

    `The fundamental maxims of a free government seem to require, that the rights of personal liberty and private property should be held sacred.' Cross v. State, 370 P.2d 371 - Google Scholar

    The fundamental maxims of a free government seem to require, that the rights of personal liberty and private property should be held sacred. At least no court of justice in this country would be warranted in assuming, that the power to violate and disregard them; a power so repugnant to the common principles of justice and civil liberty lurked under any general grant of legislative authority, or ought to be implied from any general expressions of the will of the people. The people ought not to be presumed to part with rights so vital to their security and well being, without very strong and direct expressions of such an intention. In Terret vs. Taylor, 9 Cranch, 43, it was held by this Court, that a grant or title to lands once made by the legislature to any person or corporation is irrevocable, and cannot be re-assumed by any subsequent legislative act; and that a different doctrine is utterly inconsistent with the great and fundamental principle of a republican government, and with the right of the citizens to the free enjoyment of their property lawfully 658*658 acquired.Cross v. State, 370 P.2d 371 - Google Scholar


    It would seem to me that hedging private property rights is a anti-American move.

  10. #510
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,040

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I read your entire post. Don't assume that your words weren't read just because they weren't quoted and/or were ignored.
    Well then dont ask silly questions when you should have known my point to the sentence that you quoted by the supporting information of the entire paragraph.


    I don't agree with their opinion on the issue, no. They're still a great hub of legal information, though, providing accurate quotes and links directly to the actual state laws they cover. I'm a life NRA member, that doesn't mean I agree with the NRA's opinion of disarming when a private owner wants, even where there's no legal need to comply. Within pro-2A, opinions can very greatly.
    I have no expectations that you will agree with everything that I say. But since you have been touting and protecting the NRA and are indeed a lifetime member of the NRA I would halfway expect that you are speaking for the NRA as a member. You would do well then to determine that you are speaking personally when speaking about your own opinions. And to point out when you are representing your club.

    I'm not going to buy 'no-gun = no-money' cards and hand them to businesses with gun-buster signs. My thoughts on those cards is 1. a person with a gun can't give the card to the owner because the person with the gun isn't supposed to enter the property in the first place...so if you're going to enter the property with the gun then save the card and just do your shopping; 2. if you're going to disarm so as to deliver a card to the owner, then since you're disarming anyway just save the card and do your shopping.
    Well if you can pick and choose from your own references I assume that everyone can as well. And I did just that either your source is good or is it not? Your source backed my argument so my argument stands by your own source.

    I don't recognize a business owner's authority to ban my firearm from my person just because they feel like it. I carry regardless.
    Then in most states you are claiming that you would break the known laws on the issue. Which I agree is your choice but I do not have to agree that its a wise choice, but its your liberty.

    Everyone already knows this. Constantly restating it changes nothing I've said. I carry regardless. If I'm caught then it's my fault for not concealing correctly.
    I am not trying to stop you personally from doing anything. This debate is not about you. But take note that what I have restated is relevant regardless of your personal opinions. I have stated the American concept of private property rights which in most states are actually proven by law. You can choose to ignore the law and the Constitution in your daily life, but in this debate you cannot. Which at times you have made attempts to show legal support of your claims but when confronted with the fact that American history does not agree with the new laws you start ignoring the legal facts to pad your opinion.


    Again one of those pesky American facts for you to argue against: `The fundamental maxims of a free government seem to require, that the rights of personal liberty and private property should be held sacred.' Cross v. State, 370 P.2d 371 - Google Scholar

Page 51 of 54 FirstFirst ... 414950515253 ... 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
  •