Sandy Hook lawsuit against gun maker can move forward.

a reply to: Astyanax

My rights are not determined by my neighbors or by you.

Unless you embrace an authoritarian state approach.

Do you prefer a society based on dictates by a controlling central authority versus freedom?

a reply to: DBCowboy

My rights are not determined by my neighbors or by you.

False. Your rights end where mine start.
And vice versa.

Or are you claiming that anyone can do whatever they want?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DBCowboy

My rights are not determined by my neighbors or by you.

False. Your rights end where mine start.
And vice versa.

Or are you claiming that anyone can do whatever they want?

As long as my rights didn't infringe upon yours why in the #### would you care?

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DBCowboy

My rights are not determined by my neighbors or by you.

False. Your rights end where mine start.
And vice versa.

Or are you claiming that anyone can do whatever they want?

As long as my rights didn't infringe upon yours why in the #### would you care?

I don't. But that's not what you said. Remember?

My rights are not determined by my neighbors or by you.

Your rights are determined by the rights of your neighbors, and me.

a reply to: Phage

If my actions infringe upon you then they stop being "rights".

My rights are individual and are not based on your feelings, attitudes.

My owning firearms does not affect your household.

a reply to: DBCowboy

My owning firearms does not affect your household.

True. But how you choose to use them could, indeed, affect my household. When I say "you" I'm being generic, of course.

a reply to: Phage

Then "duck".

Of course, I'd be infringing on your rights if I shot you.

And should be punished accordingly.

a reply to: Phage

To be fair, that's not a particularly compelling argument because his existence in and of itself could affect your household. Or buying the wrong carton of milk at the wrong place at the wrong time.

a reply to: DBCowboy

And should be punished accordingly.

By whom? That "central controlling authority?"

a reply to: Phage

The will of the collective I presume. Of course, that's a rather unreliable font of justice. It may also decide to punish you because you're a hunchback and we don't like no hunchbacks 'round these parts.

Speaking of guns, there's someone hunting down the road. I need to check on my dog.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: Phage

The will of the collective I presume.

Collective willpower?
A lynchin'?

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Or buying the wrong carton of milk at the wrong place at the wrong time.

In which case you would rightfully be entitled to redress.

a reply to: Phage

What other non-government controlled entities that could punish someone are there?

Turns out it wasn't a gunshot, it was a car exploding or... Something. Started a grassfire.

a reply to: Astyanax

You are surely confused and wrong.

Some people may be addicted to collecting guns guns or maybe they just like to for a hobby.

And no doubt they can be used for violence, but there are lots of people that don't use them that way.

Too many movies and TV shows would be my guess.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: PraetorianAZ

Well its a good thing the bill of rights and the constitution are real and not a myth. Therefore, I have the right to own and use firearms.

Is it?

Do you?

1. Just because a prescriptive right is conferred by a piece of paper doesn't mean a corresponding natural right exists.

This is a common fallacy of those not aware of the nature of the United States Constitution. In it, these rights are NOT given, but PROTECTED. It is a very important distinction to understand. As written, it states that these rights are "self evident'" and "endowed by the creator". That means mankind cannot GRANT rights, every man. woman and child (including you) are born with these rights. The document you are referring to is an attempt to limit the government in that they are only responsible for protecting those rights of its citizens. In addition, it is charged with the responsibility to not to infringe upon them (in the case of the 2nd Amendment, it is clearly stated), and it cannot rescind them.

You not being a citizen of the U.S. I am not surprised you misunderstand this, and I hope it is more clearly understood going forward.

a reply to: DBCowboy

All rights are ultimately privileges granted by the state. Make no mistake about that. If the state refused you your rights what would you do? Go shoot up the local courthouse?

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: pteridine

I think the typo was clearly interpretable as 'pusher'. I would have changed it if I'd seen it in time.

? If I own a shotgun for hunting season, am I hooked?

Oh yes.

You kill animals for pleasure? Ugh.

I try not to guess at typos but on rereading, you are probably right.
The fact that you are a vegan certainly colors your opinion. I never shoot animals for pleasure. Deer, pheasant, and rabbit are food. Barn rats and roaming dogs and coyotes killing livestock are killed for fertilizer and to feed vultures. I have gone natural when I can. Barn cats for the rats, llamas in with the sheep, and farm dogs tend to eliminate some of the problem. All-natural lead at supersonic velocities takes care of most of the rest. I rarely shoot tomatoes for food as the pellets make the pasta sauce undesirable. I never even shoot them for pleasure; picking them and slicing them to death is part of my sadistic addiction.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: DBCowboy

All rights are ultimately privileges granted by the state. Make no mistake about that. If the state refused you your rights what would you do? Go shoot up the local courthouse?

Rights are something you are born with.

The "state" tries to restrict and control rights.

The state cannot "refuse" me my rights. The only thing "the state" can do is inhibit my right to express them.

a reply to: DBCowboy

My rights are not determined by my neighbors or by you.

Of course they are. In a democracy, your neighbours are the state.

Do you prefer a society based on dictates by a controlling central authority versus freedom?

They are not mutually exclusive. Freedom and the denial of it are tools of statecraft and law. I certainly think a government needs to be stronger than its citizens, because otherwise the strong will prey upon the weak. Government's exist to prevent this.

But all this talk of rights is irrelevant. Gun ownership is not a right, whatever it says in the American Constitution. American gun addicts made that 'right' up to excuse their compulsion.

a reply to: Astyanax

Gun ownership is a right.

No matter how much you try to deny it.