If nothing blows up tomorrow, we would do well to remember that every man on this earth has an individual, unalienable, irrevocable, supreme right to his own life, to his own liberty, to his own property, to his own pursuit of happiness, and that no other man or group of men on earth has any claim over these rights.
These rights are absolute.
If anything blows up tomorrow, we would do well to remember the exact same principles — the exact same facts of reality that are not up for debate.
And in addition, we would do well to remember that in the united American States, not only is it moral, ethical, logical, proper, and fully rational to defend these rights by any and all means necessary, up to and including lethal retaliatory force — by the objective legal principle of Declarationism, it is legal to do so.
It is the law that government not only protect these rights, but also, never violate them.
This is the reason why the American union of independent States is the greatest country on earth currently in existence, and to have ever existed.
Because man’s right to his own individual life was not only the moral standard on which this country was founded, it is the legal standard upon which all of our laws have always rested, and will always rest.
Anything and everything in contradiction with this is illegal, null, and void.
– Anthony Dream Johnson
And yet, having travelled to over 30 countries, I have experienced more individual freedom in many of them than I do in the USA.
And yet, the loaded handgun I carry in my pocket, while shopping for groceries, walking down the street, or sipping Starbucks, says different.
That’s because you’ve never travelled outside the US. Go east young man, go east!
I’ve never traveled outside the US?
#facepalm
Let me guess – Canada, Mexico, Australia and maybe New Zealand or UK. Right?
Not enough!
Guns are allowed in many other countries. While all of them have some form of gun control, so does the U.S. And the right to own firearms is only one dimension of freedom – other countries are vastly superior in terms of economic freedom and the degree of “police state” that they have. America in 2011 is no longer the America that Ayn Rand wrote about.
And that’s exactly it. Guns are not “allowed” in the United States — your RIGHT TO OWN THEM is still protected by government.
This is not a difference in semantics, it is a difference in fundamental principle.
“And the right to own firearms is only one dimension of freedom – other countries are vastly superior in terms of economic freedom and the degree of “police state” that they have.”
Exactly. But he’s not travelled enough outside the States to experience this.
I’ve never had the need for a gun. In fact, I never even thought about owning one. Furthermore, I never think about guns in general so having the “right to gun ownership” is not something my brain immediately thinks about when it hears the words “rights” or “freedoms”.
The government has immediate access to ALL of our electronic messages. Every email, every cell phone message. We are exposed. Nothing is hidden.
Speaking of guns…. Americans can get arrested for having a gun holster. Not a gun, just a gun holster. Why would one want a gun holster. Say one lives in an unsafe area and wants to give the impression that he has a gun in his possession in his car or home to scare off thugs.
Just the holster gets you arrested.
True story.
“Furthermore, I never think about guns in general so having the “right to gun ownership” is not something my brain immediately thinks about when it hears the words “rights” or “freedoms”.”
The greatest country on earth was founded on the retaliatory use of a gun. The fact that this is apparently inconsequential in your mind further exposes your gaping ignorance. Fact is, I exist by right in the State of Florida, and a couple million fellow gun owners do as well. And that’s one state out of 50.
You think people in North Korea exist by right? Or by the “benevolence” of government.
Gun ownership has never been an issue for me. I’ve never needed one. You need one? Want one? Like the way it feels on your hip in Starbucks? Hey, knock yourself out! Collect as many as your little heart desires, big boy.
Big fucking deal.
I spend at least half my time in other countries anyway.
Its a non-issue for me.
Get it? Got it? Good.
In the 20th century alone, tens of millions of people were starved to death, shot, tortured, forced into gas chambers, etc, in a “healthy” variety and span of countries claiming “for the common good”.
Belittle the rational individual who chooses to protect his life from any and all threats — including government — all you want, I will bet you my life that every one of those murdered individuals wished they had the ability to fight back against tyranny when it was choking the life out of them and 50,000 of their neighbors.
Get a clue dumb fuck.
“Belittle”?
You are trying to argue where there is no argument. Want a gun? Get one. I’m not opposed to it.
“Dumb fuck” ?
Classy.
You’re great PR for the 21 Convention.
Greatest country on earth?
Patriotism, another form of narcissism, is the idea that a country is great because I was born in it.
I’ve been to over 30 countries, lived for extended periods of time in 6, and I am still on the fence about which one out of them is the “greatest” among them.
My experience is yet still too limited to conclude which is the “greatest on Earth” until I’ve lived in all of them to gain practical experience.
Unlike you, I don’t need to visit every nook and cranny on earth to figure out that the greatest was the one founded, and currently existing on the supremacy of man’s individual right to his own life. No other country on earth has been established in this manner, let alone exists to this day.
Nice narcissist shot. If you only knew how much.
SMH, you reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalllly need to get out more.
Or at least read the constitutions of other nations.
under that logic there should be no right of the government to take a life, and yet the death penalty exists.
Canada might have you guys beat!
Not true. Government is a monopoly on force, to be use properly only as an agent in retaliatory force. So long as a person has committed violence against another first, and it has been proven in an objective court, and death as a punishment is deemed a proper punishment, rare as it may be, it is a proper exercise of government.
As an obvious question; Where do these rights come from ?
To restate the point, George Carlin:
An accurate assessment of objective reality, of course.
“the rational individual who chooses to protect his life from any and all threats — including government ”
You really think a gun can protect you from the US government?
If you get harrassed by a police officer and pull out your gun you WILL be thrown in jail at best or shot and killed at worse.
Ever hear of the case of the guy who went to jail over a…… TOY GUN?
Your gun has no practical use against the US government. None at all.
Against an intruder in your home? Sure.
US government? NADA.
Don’t kid yourself. You pride yourself on “rationalism” so get some.
Hah, Here’s another Carlin for you;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ssYezFw_Qs
Regardless of anti-gun rhetoric; The Swiss seem to have a system for this (Everybody has guns, it seems).
It’s not a question of the availability of tools to destroy life, but of the culture for their application.
Gun control means gun culture (the positive kind).
Not Banning guns.
Now, here’s another rhetorical tool; the question.
Would knowing you could be shot on sight if you broke into someones home, legally, deter you from breaking into someones home ? (rhetorical question, with “obvious” answer.)
Now, as I consider myself a strange libertarian bastard, I cannot argue for a single moment that people shouldn’t be allowed the security and peace(piece) (at least the one of mind,) that a gun can lend them.
Your arguments seem to be that people should be denied the freedom to acquire Arms, and that the Government somehow should control this. (note: Government is small, and only works as long as people go along with it; if it rubs too much the wrong way, well… That’s when the guns no longer matter, but only act as tools to get the job done cleaner and quicker.)
Regardless of what your beliefs are, whether they be in supernatural Rights that appear from nowhere, mutually agreed upon and voluntary contractual obligations (an example of Anarchy), or just plain dictated Top-to-bottom temporary rights granted from the King to the serfs, You have yet to argue logically against guns. (Pretty similar to the whole arguments of banning drugs.)
So, give us a rational, logical reasoning as to wherefore we should not be allowed (by whom, and by what power vested in this entity, from where) to own, and use, guns.
“If nothing blows up tomorrow, we would do well to remember that every man on this earth has an individual, unalienable, irrevocable, supreme right to his own life, to his own liberty, to his own property, to his own pursuit of happiness, and that no other man or group of men on earth has any claim over these rights.
These rights are absolute.”
Absolutely not. There is no such thing as “rights” in nature. Humans bond together and form communities large or small wherein they consciously and purposely DECIDE what manmade rights will be meted out amongst them.
The concept of rights emerged only with “civilization”.
Left in the raw and left to nature, HUMANS ARE FOOD. Food for other humans as well as animals.
Nature is brutal. There is no such thing as “unalienable right to life” in nature.
Situate, steady your trigger finger and think before you type. What you describe as man-made rights that are decided among formed communities are simply laws to provide additional structure and provide a standard of behavior (according to subjective beliefs and the culture of the time of course) that acts as a collective blanket over people who certainly do have the right to live as Anthony has described. In some cases around the world the blanket is woven/maintained by the wrong minds.
Oppressive governmental actions and naively/maliciously written laws, are two examples of conflicts against that right to live as an individual; a monopoly on power and a complicated intermixing with the aforementioned system of laws (aka your ‘man-made rights’) that are enforced with that same power (with a police force that is conversely well-armed) technically allows a government body to dominate the individual for it’s own sake (the military draft, income tax, etc.). With a little creativity, these powers can be exercised under the guise of something greater than the individual (i.e. the War on Terror, economic shutdowns).
Meanwhile, the hypothetical desperate mugger won’t read you your rights before going for your throat, hence a sound logic in being armed to defend your right to live, and possibly the rights of those you love; it’s just fucking smart to have a backup plan if and when the shit hits.
Digression: You describe the brutality of nature, yet do you really have so much confidence that the construct of civilization over that fundamental reality prevents the breeding of bad enough situations/people that your life cannot be put in jeopardy? Crime is a way of life for certain people. Some crime involves life-threatening situations that can be hedged against with a good firearm at your side. Trading some fiat currency for that is a sound trade in my book
.
Brag: Sig Sauer P226 – navy seal edition 9mm. Bring on the zombies.