1,768
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 46:
Line 46: + +
Talk:National Rifle Association (view source)
Revision as of 18:16, April 28, 2007
, 18:16, April 28, 2007→Constitutional right or human right?
: This is ridiculous. Whether or not the UN has problems with anti-semitism has nothing to do with whether their enumeration of human rights is important. However, as far as I'm aware, even the NRA itself doesn't attempt to claim that the right bear arms is a fundamental human right. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 14:11, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
: This is ridiculous. Whether or not the UN has problems with anti-semitism has nothing to do with whether their enumeration of human rights is important. However, as far as I'm aware, even the NRA itself doesn't attempt to claim that the right bear arms is a fundamental human right. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 14:11, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
::Well, you can DERIVE a right to own a firearm from natural rights. It is a given that one natural right of human beings is the right to life. To state that negatively, human beings have a natural right not to be killed. Therefore, all human beings have the right to self-defense, as it necessary in order to ensure that their right to not be killed is upheld. To ensure that humans have the right to self-defense, humans need arms to help them fight off an attacker. This is the same logic that is used to explain why states can have a military. The right to continued existence implies a right to self-defense, and a right to self-defense requires a right to be able to fight back.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 14:16, 28 April 2007 (EDT)