View Single Post
Old November 5 2009, 05:25 PM   #76
Sci's Avatar
Location: Montgomery County, State of Maryland
Re: "Children of Earth" & the Right to Bear Arms (spoilers)

Captaindemotion wrote: View Post
^ Umm - guns are dangerous.
Guns can be dangerous, but they are not inherently so. A gun has to be loaded and then pointed pointed at a person to be dangerous.

Now, that's not to say that they should not be treated as the weapons they are. They have to be used responsibly. But that's hardly something that is beyond the capacity of a responsible adult -- my mother grew up in a household were guns were present, and because everyone was taught gun safety, not once was anyone injured by a gun, and not once did a gun ever endanger anyone unintentionally.

There was one incident in which a gun had to be used, and it illustrates the point about the right to use a firearm defensively quite well. One evening, when my mother and aunt were teenagers, a young man who was high on meth had threatened a friend of my aunt's at a party. They both left and came home. The man followed them and attempted to break in; my grandmother called the police and they chased him away. A short time later, he returned; my grandmother called the police again, they chased him away, and they left. Then, a short time later, the young man returned again, attempting to break the door down and threatening everyone inside. My grandmother had everyone go upstairs, pulled out a firearm, stood at the top of the stairs, called outside to warn the young man that she had a gun, and phoned the police to inform them that this man was trying to break into her home for the third time that night, he was threatening everyone in the house, and that she had a gun and would use it to defend her family and guest if he attempted to go up the stairs. The police finally decided to show up and actually do more than just chase this guy off.

That was the only time anyone in my mother's family ever so much as threatened to use a gun on anyone, and it was completely responsible and completely just of them to do so in that situation. The man was a clear danger and they had a right to engage in self-defense if the police could not be relied upon.

Bottom line: A gun is not something that is inherently dangerous, and it can be used responsibly by the vast majority of citizens. I don't disagree that there are some people who should not be allowed access to guns and that gun control laws should be tougher. But let's not pretend that gun ownership is something that inherently violates other people's rights, either.

Starkers wrote: View Post
Guns don't kill people, people kill people...with guns!
People can kill people with knives, too. People can kill people with their bare hands. But just as knife ownership does not inherently violate someone else's rights, neither does gun ownership. Owning a gun is not the same thing as assaulting someone; owning a knife is not the same thing as assaulting someone; knowing a martial art is not the same thing as assaulting someone.

If society is predicated upon the idea that people have a right to do anything that does not violate someone else's rights, then people have a right to own weapons and that's all there is to it.

captcalhoun wrote: View Post
guns = gays. WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?!
Insofar as homosexuality and gun ownership are both things which violate no one else's rights but which others try to restrict on the basis of personal dislike, yes.
Democratic socialism is the hope of human freedom.
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote