Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
Showing Original Post only (View all)The right to life [View all]
The Declaration of Independence says:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..."
I'm not sure about anyone else out there but, as I see it, having a right to life would include a right to self-defense, a right which would include the right to keep and bear arms.
What happens to that right if and when a government impairs, burdens or works to eliminate it?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
96 replies, 11569 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
96 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What if the state or those empowered through it seek to take a person's life without due process?
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2016
#3
You understand, that since the OP is about the Declaration of Independence
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2016
#26
The citation in the OP is from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2016
#17
Yes, it would be illegal. Hence my use of the term "prohibited." Please answer my question --
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2016
#16
It seems to me the debate ought to be centered more on whether an instance of self-defense was
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2016
#22
You claim to acknowledge the right to self defense but you're content with banning the means
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2016
#34
The law is not a naturally occuring thing, it is only a human construct.
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2016
#40
The action of self-defense stands apart from possession of a banned weapon
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Feb 2016
#33
It is illegal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater only if there is not a fire. If there is a fire
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2016
#41
But had the person been obedient to the law they would not have been able to use the
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2016
#46
I'm not going to agree or disagree on anything until you substantiate your claim.
beevul
Feb 2016
#72
That sounds nice, but what percentage of the homicides are committted by repeat offenders?
guillaumeb
Feb 2016
#94
Well maybe but you certainly a right to hyperbole but just a few questions
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Feb 2016
#85
I'm not the one who brought up this tired old "right to life" arguement for weapons.
stone space
Feb 2016
#87