Trash The 2nd Amendment

in #informationwar7 years ago (edited)

Do I have your attention?


Source


I know this is a common thing to say, but I am taking it in a very different direction. My problem with the 2nd Amendment, and all government instantiated rights for that matter, is that it leads people to believe that rights come from the state when in reality they do not. The reality is that the right to bear arms exists without the 2nd Amendment, and would probably be better served in absence of government enshrinement.

Your Rights Are Inherent:

Derived from first principle and simple mathematical logic, it can be easily shown that there are no circumstances under which prohibitions on any form of property or possession can be accomplished without the initiation of force and are shown to be internally contradictory as a result. In a practical sense allow me to explain the reasoning.

The Logic:

  • Premise: You own yourself (I can provide the proof, but I will start with this as a premise for brevity)
  1. If you own yourself, nothing and no one else can own you.
  2. What you purchase or create is a result of your self ownership
  3. Inhibiting another's self ownership can only exist logically if you own that person.
  4. Therefore, it follows truth-functionally, that curtailing the property rights of anyone other than yourself cannot be maintained logically and thus violates the principle of non-contradiction.

Complacency:

The biggest problem I see is that people think that since the government protects this specific right, that it is real. In fact, the opposite is the case. Any time where you hand the defense of your rights to another, you are giving that entity the power to violate your rights. Besides, the US does not defend gun rights in any sense (NFA, GCA, Hughes Amendment).

Practical lesson:

Stop using 2A to defend gun rights. The right to own weapons, or any property for that matter, exists in absolute and can be derived logically. Anyone who argues otherwise is accepting contradictions and is false. Argue from logic. Logic is objective and verifiably true, unlike laws.

bottom.png

All meaningful comments get an upvote and a response!

-@roofcore

Sort:  

Curated for #informationwar (by @wakeupnd)
Relevance: speaking the truth
Our Purpose

Self ownership is one way of changing the hearts and minds. I also like to use double standards to illustrate my point. “You say the police and military should be the only ones who should have guns, but then you say the police are racists and the military are baby killers. Why would you want only racist baby killers to be the only armed?” The looks on their faces is priceless.

I wonder if that even computes or just gets completely ignored. The blatant contradiction is so readily apparent I am shocked that they haven't come to terms with it or developed some Olympic gold medal earning mental gymnastics in order to justify it.

Mostly I get the blank stare for a second, then they try to deflect. It is quite amusing.

I'd imagine that to be the case

I read your post and will read it again. Especially to give it time to think it over plus I still need to answer my pen-pal who is an inmate in the USA. And yes we also discuss this subject. I think the main "thing" if it comes to weapons is that if you have the right to (the right to defend yourself what is taken away from us long ago but an animal and even a plant its right) we all can be responsible for our own deeds and safety. The governments do no good if it comes to it. They only make it worse

that's just it right? We are all responsible for our actions. If you harm someone, the community will hold you accountable. If we don't have complete self ownership, then how can we have functioning justice right? If you aren't the complete owner of yourself and your actions, then how can you be punished for the actions you did?

You can't and "justice"/law already proved it does not work the way they want it. The more responsibility taken away the less responsible people (the society) feels.

The word RIGHT is said to be a morally,good justices or acceptable true,correction as a fact in a satisfactory condition relating to a person or group,this word works for people in difference ways,some are deprived of their right due to injustices while the freedom of speech is being taken from them,while others does not know the real meaning of right,with that they keep breaking the laws.