Do our rights come with a responsibility?

[M14 Shooter]

I proffer the word itself, "arms" needs to be defined in terms of the original use of the word as understood in the 18th Century.

A completely unsupportable position, given current jurispridence regarding the 2nd, and that the protections of the bill or rights are clearly neither dependent on nor limited to the technology of the 18th century.

 

[The Rabbi]

Dugdale_Jukes believes our rights are sacrosanct, s/he also believes laws which restrict any regulations of arms s/he will disobey. So s/he believes we are a nations of laws but s/he is the final arbitrator of what laws are obeyed and what laws are not.

The final arbitrator is the USSC. To date the Court has recognzied reasonable regulation of arms is not a violation of the Second Amendment. Time will tell if the current court will take on the issue, but I cannot imagine the Justices to expand the SA to disallow government at all levels some discretion.

I proffer the word itself, "arms" needs to be defined in terms of the original use of the word as understood in the 18th Century.

OK. "Arms" meant anything a common soldier would carry as a personal weapon. Today that means an M-16/M4 with 3 rd burst and a Beretta M9 or 1911, perhaps a SIG P228.
Still down with that?

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

IMO there is personal responsibility to your family and civil liability if you harm someone by accident, but no one is taking my guns - except from my cold, dead fingers. Did I mention none are or ever shall be registered during my lifetime? And that I'll buy and sell as it pleases me.

Valuing the Constitution - especially my right to own guns, my right to the pursuit of happiness, and my right to be let alone by meddling fuckers, is a whole world different than being an anti-American fascist trying to control other people's private lives.

Next you'll be telling me I like Obama. People who make assumptions based on their own sick, twisted pathologies tend to cause more problems than they solve. Think about that and you'll feel bad. Act on it by respecting yourself enough to stay out of the private lives of others and your life gets better every day.

To recap: Next.

You do not value the US Constitution if you so flagrantly violate laws you do not like. We don't get to choose which laws we obey and then get to call ourselves defenders of the Constitution.

You have an ignoramus' view of America and the US Constitution. I'd support the government doing a Ruby Ridge and a Waco on you

cowardly misfits like you destroy America and attempt harm to Law Enforcement who work in our name

No, it ain't me, babe; it is sheeple like you destroying America ever since the rise of the human potential movement enabled losers to try to legislate life's finish lines. Life ain't t-ball, there, sportette. Some win. Others lose. Get used to it.

Bitch and moan, whine and cavil, tattle and run - your likely strength areas. My life has been lived with people like you either at my feet or my throat. At the end of the day, they all end up in the rear view mirror.

Next.

 

[PredFan]

All three are correct. Our rights are sacrosanct and cannot be infringed upon, we have a duty to act responsibly, and we can disobey laws we don't like. Civil disobedience is what it is usually called.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Uh-huh.
But you'll be happy to tell me there's a responsibility attached to the right to keep and bear arms.

IMO there is personal responsibility to your family and civil liability if you harm someone by accident...

Like I said - you'll be happy to tell me there's a responsibility attached to the right to keep and bear arms.
Where's the difference?

If you can't tell the difference between family safety - including with family weapons, humanity's history in re civil liability managing one's personal weapons and the scum of the earth attempting to use community law to meddle in the private reproductive choices of others, what is the point of continuing to discuss these issues?

However, generosity of spirit impels one more try to help you understand how life works among decent people of normal emotional maturity:

1. Most folks take steps to keep their families safe from accidents with weapons. No change due to my view in that, son.

2. Most folks support individual responsibilities in regard to personal weapons. Old as the hills; again, no change.

3. Honest, decent people see no need to meddle in others' private lives. Another time-honored tradition.

4. Meddlers are meddlers. Most meddlers meddle to compensate for their own personal failures.

=====================================

So, to your claim: bullshit.

Meddlers are meddlers.

'Twas ever thus.

 

[there4eyeM]

What can possibly be the question here? No responsibility, no rights.

Rights, by linguistic and psychological definition, are concepts of human beings to be interpreted and used as humans see fit. An adult makes decisions about what he/she will do. An adult takes responsibility for his/her actions. A person that acts otherwise cannot be considered adult.

P.S. I really like "Shine On Brightly".

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Dugdale_Jukes believes our rights are sacrosanct...

That is a lie. Why can't you be satisfied with being depraved enough to misrepresent the rest? What pathology requires you to actually lie when the evidence you are lying is almost in sight?

Here are the facts about my beliefs:

No right comes without responsibilities, which may or may not require civil disobedience (e.g. disobeying bad law) - and nothing ever written by me contradicts that.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here's the thing, chief; an abortion is a medical procedure. The patient's responsibilities in comparision to the patient's "rights" are identical to those when visiting the dentist or any other medical procedure.

To view an abortion differently, one would have to buy into the notion that laws in the Constitution and notes on medical procedures in the Bible are wrong.

According to the supreme court the Constitution provides rights to freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom FROM government interference in private behaviors including a right "to be let alone", while the Bible, when it mentions punishing abortion at all, suggests small fines as the most severe penalties for abortion - and then only for causing one accidentally in someone else's family.

So all the nutball horseshit notwithstanding, abortion is a long term right in the history of most cultures. Only papist scum got it outlawed in some jurisdictions in America before evangelical scum took over the heavy lifting.

Next.

Uh-huh.
But you'll be happy to tell me there's a responsibility attached to the right to keep and bear arms.

IMO there is personal responsibility to your family and civil liability if you harm someone by accident, but no one is taking my guns - except from my cold, dead fingers. Did I mention none are or ever shall be registered during my lifetime? And that I'll buy and sell as it pleases me.

ALL OF WHICH WOULD MAKE YOU A FELON AND CAUSE YOU TO LOSE YOUR GUNS AND YOUR LIBERTY.

Valuing the Constitution - especially my right to own guns, my right to the pursuit of happiness, and my right to be let alone by meddling fuckers, is a whole world different than being an anti-American fascist trying to control other people's private lives.

COMMENTS SUCH AS THESE SUGGEST AN UNSTABLE PERSON CAPABLE OF THE TYPES OF ACTS WHICH HAVE BROUGHT THE WHOLE ISSUE OF GUN CONTROL TO THE NATION'S ATTENTION.

Next you'll be telling me I like Obama. People who make assumptions based on their own sick, twisted pathologies tend to cause more problems than they solve. Think about that and you'll feel bad. Act on it by respecting yourself enough to stay out of the private lives of others and your life gets better every day.

To recap: Next.

We are a nation of laws, and respect and compliance with the law is by its very nature a sign of a good citizen, maturity and common sense.

No one, no matter what you believe, has ever but forth a bill in the Congress to take away a citizens Right to own, possess, or have in his/her custody and control a firearm. There is debate within the Congress and among the people as to the nature of the firearm; the type of magazine and ammunition, it's rate of fire and the velocity of the projectile.

The USSC has recognized as constitutional regulations and restrictions in regards to the ownership of arms and the type of arms - this is not new. Felons, parolees, probationers, the insane, the intemperate have lost their right to ownership; the common man is restricted from owning automatic weapons, RPG's, anti-tank weapons and most States outlaw push button knives.

 

[GuyPinestra]

We are a nation of laws, and respect and compliance with the law is by its very nature a sign of a good citizen, maturity and common sense.

Slaveholders made that same argument...

No one, no matter what you believe, has ever but forth a bill in the Congress to take away a citizens Right to own, possess, or have in his/her custody and control a firearm. There is debate within the Congress and among the people as to the nature of the firearm; the type of magazine and ammunition, it's rate of fire and the velocity of the projectile.

Doing a little hair-splitting here, aren't you?

The USSC has recognized as constitutional regulations and restrictions in regards to the ownership of arms and the type of arms - this is not new. Felons, parolees, probationers, the insane, the intemperate have lost their right to ownership; the common man is restricted from owning automatic weapons, RPG's, anti-tank weapons and most States outlaw push button knives.

Probationers? The 'intemperate'? I think you're wrong on those, Wry...

And the 'common man' CAN own automatic weapons simply by filling out the registration and paying the licensing fee.

 

[bripat9643]

What can possibly be the question here? No responsibility, no rights.

Rights, by linguistic and psychological definition, are concepts of human beings to be interpreted and used as humans see fit.

Another left-wing idiot who has no clue as to what rights are. They are as common as grains of sand on the beach.

 

[bripat9643]

No one, no matter what you believe, has ever but forth a bill in the Congress to take away a citizens Right to own, possess, or have in his/her custody and control a firearm. There is debate within the Congress and among the people as to the nature of the firearm; the type of magazine and ammunition, it's rate of fire and the velocity of the projectile.

You're obviously a moron.

Dianne Feinstein just put forth such a bill. What you meant to say is that no one has put forth a bill to take away the right to own every single class of firearm in existence. Only a servile boot licking toad believes that the 2nd Amendment isn't infringed if the government continues to allow you to own a B-B gun. That's where the DimoRAT path of "reasonable regulations on guns" leads.

 

[Papawx3]

All rights AND privileges carry with them the absolute demand that we use them responsibly and act accordingly.
For instance: I am of the firm belief that I have the right to own a firearm, if that is my choice. Along with that though, I have the responsibility to use it safely and make sure that no innocent party is harmed with that firearm. What I'm saying is that if I choose to go out in my back yard and shoot my weapons, I cannot fire them towards an occupied building or across a public highway.
Likewise, I have the privilege of being licensed to operate a motor vehicle on the highways. That doesn't mean though that I can get drunk and drive it at high speed down the wrong way on the interstate or other highways.
So, Yes. Rights and privileges always carry with them a rather large degree of responsibility.

 

[PaulS1950]

Yes, but the responsibilities associated with rights and privileges are very different. A privilege can be revoked by law but a right cannot. If you fail to use a right with the proper responsibility you lose it by your own action - not by some law. There are laws in place that describe those failings but the law does not take the right, it is your own action that removes your right.

Our rights are birthrights but our privileges are provide by the government. There fore the government can take the privileges away but our rights can't be taken by the government.
Even a felon retains the right to free speech. After ten years of good behavior a felon can petition to have all his rights returned.