790
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 20:
Line 20: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:National Rifle Association (view source)
Revision as of 15:54, April 27, 2007
, 15:54, April 27, 2007no edit summary
::since when does the UN decide things like this?[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]
::since when does the UN decide things like this?[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]
::: Well, so this should be fun (although sorry to derail the talk).
'The United Nations (an anti-semitic organization)'
Wuh? The organisation that set up the state of Israel in the first place is anti-semitic?
'doesn't know a damn thing about human rights'
If it doesn't, who does? Brightest minds of a generation, [[Eleanor Roosevelt]] and co, came together to write that declaration. I would trust them to know about human rights.
'It's the gang that stood by and watch the genocide in Rwanda!'
[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/evil/interviews/gourevitch.html No it wasn't.] The USA refused to give support, and France, China and Russia believed that it was 'an internal affair' and thus it was wrong for the UN to be involved. 4/5 security council permanent members against? Pretty strong responsibility for those four. Dallaire actually wanted to intervene.
'The right to own a firearm, is based on the right to self-defense, i.e., the right to those means to defend oneself against those who wish to destroy one's life. The right to self-defense is itself is a corollary of the right to life.'
Woo, first actual bit of debate. The UN wouldn't seem to think that it was right to respond until it was actually attacked (UN Charter Article 50-something sets a precedent). Nonetheless, there is no derogation for human rights, especially article 3, i.e. someone does not forefeit their right to life if they try to take yours. Difficult, but ultimately for the best.
'since when does the UN decide things like this?'
Since, uh, the big charter the UN published that says [http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html lthese are your human rights]. America's signing of the Declaration means that it acknowledged that these were the human rights that all people had. As I said, right to bear arms is not one, so it is not a human right, but, with its mention in the Constitution, it is a constitutional right.
Sorry if I seem confrontational, but I'm tired and feel strongly on this subject. --<font color="#222222" face="Times New Roman">Wik</font><font color="#444444" face="Times New Roman">i</font><font color="#666666" face="Times New Roman">nterpreter</font>'''<sup>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Wikinterpreter talk?]</sup>