Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Employers can forbid guns, a judge rules, issues an injunction against OK law.
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="henschman" data-source="post: 1075754" data-attributes="member: 4235"><p>That's what judges and governments have done to our natural liberty over the years, but no, they have no RIGHT to do that. The fact that our rights are commonly violated do not in any way diminish the fact that we have those rights. "society" has no rights or interests. Only individuals do. Society is just a collection of individuals, and has no more rights than any individual people do. There's nothing magical about organizing people together into a mob and calling it "society" that gives you the right to violate anybody's liberty. Notions like "society's clear and compelling interest" are pure collectivism and are antithetical to individual liberty.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Property rights and the right to live, like all true rights, do not conflict with each other, so there's no need to decide which trumps which. You have an absolute right to protect your life whenever it is threatened. That doesn't mean you have the right to trespass on other people's property by carrying weapons when the owner prohibits it. If you feel it would be an unacceptable threat to your life to go without being armed, you have the choice of not going on that person's property.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="henschman, post: 1075754, member: 4235"] That's what judges and governments have done to our natural liberty over the years, but no, they have no RIGHT to do that. The fact that our rights are commonly violated do not in any way diminish the fact that we have those rights. "society" has no rights or interests. Only individuals do. Society is just a collection of individuals, and has no more rights than any individual people do. There's nothing magical about organizing people together into a mob and calling it "society" that gives you the right to violate anybody's liberty. Notions like "society's clear and compelling interest" are pure collectivism and are antithetical to individual liberty. Property rights and the right to live, like all true rights, do not conflict with each other, so there's no need to decide which trumps which. You have an absolute right to protect your life whenever it is threatened. That doesn't mean you have the right to trespass on other people's property by carrying weapons when the owner prohibits it. If you feel it would be an unacceptable threat to your life to go without being armed, you have the choice of not going on that person's property. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Employers can forbid guns, a judge rules, issues an injunction against OK law.
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom