Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-21-2018, 06:16 PM
 
Location: San Jose
2,594 posts, read 1,241,335 times
Reputation: 2590

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310 View Post
The actual owning of a nuke weapon is not illegal. Just the proper storing of the fissile material could be cost prohibitive.
Actually it is illegal.

18 U.S. Code § 832 - Participation in nuclear and weapons of mass destruction threats to the United States

18 U.S. Code § 831 - Prohibited transactions involving nuclear materials
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2018, 06:33 PM
 
3,366 posts, read 1,606,149 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
The Constitution does not mention anything about assault style weapons. Is it not true that the weapons of the time were 'flintlock' that shot one at a time, and could take minutes to reload?

Assault style weapons can hold 30 ammunition bullets, and are designed for mass slaughter. In my view that goes against the 5th & 14th Amendment's requirement of 'due process,' and violates the spirit of the Declaration's "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" clause.
It is odd that you are still continuing this obviously false account. What is the objective of pretending to be this ignorant?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 06:42 PM
 
Location: San Jose
2,594 posts, read 1,241,335 times
Reputation: 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
Just because someone can prevent you from exercising your natural right to self defense doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

If someone prevents a woman from having an abortion, does that make Roe v Wade null and void?

Did that slave being whipped not have a natural human right to escape or otherwise prevent being whipped if he could?


Say you and I are the last two people on Earth after some natural disaster.....

Now, being that I'm well over 6 foot and a hair shy of 240 lbs......chances are better than average that I'm bigger and stronger than you are. ....(maybe you're bigger, doesn't really matter)

If I decide that you have stuff that I want and I'm willing to beat you ....or worse to get it....

Do you have a natural right to defend yourself from me in any way you can?

Keep in mind there are no police to call.

No courts to convict me.

Do you or do you not have a right to defend yourself and your property against me?
The definition of "Natural" is:

existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind.

Well we don't see the natural world engaging in or enforcing any form of rights. This would mean that natural rights must come from God. The problem is now you have to prove God exists. To sum it up, there is no such thing as "natural rights". All "rights" are nothing more then a social construct.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 06:56 PM
 
3,366 posts, read 1,606,149 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno View Post
The definition of "Natural" is:

existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind.

Well we don't see the natural world engaging in or enforcing any form of rights. This would mean that natural rights must come from God. The problem is now you have to prove God exists. To sum it up, there is no such thing as "natural rights". All "rights" are nothing more then a social construct.
You don't seem to understand, at all, the concept that you are attempting to discuss.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 07:00 PM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,461 posts, read 7,089,783 times
Reputation: 11702
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno View Post
The definition of "Natural" is:

existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind.

Well we don't see the natural world engaging in or enforcing any form of rights. This would mean that natural rights must come from God. The problem is now you have to prove God exists. To sum it up, there is no such thing as "natural rights". All "rights" are nothing more then a social construct.

Maybe the word "rights" as it is defined by a typical statist isn't the right way to describe the concept.
Because a typical statist can't wrap their heads around the idea that anything can happen outside of government.

But it exists nonetheless.

Natural rights don't need to be "enforced" to exist.

How about answering the question posed in the post you quoted:

In the absence of government, do you have a natural right to defend yourself against me if I try to attack you?

I'm not asking you if you have a right to succeed in defending yourself.....just that you have a right to try to defend yourself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 07:08 PM
 
Location: San Jose
2,594 posts, read 1,241,335 times
Reputation: 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo302 View Post
You don't seem to understand, at all, the concept that you are attempting to discuss.
Do you have a point you would like to make? You probably don't or can't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 07:11 PM
 
Location: Morrison, CO
34,231 posts, read 18,579,444 times
Reputation: 25802
We do posses Natural Rights as human being whether you believe in a "Creator" or not. One of them is the right to self defense from predators. The tool used to defend is irrelevant. The fact remains that we are not meant to be defenseless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 07:21 PM
 
3,366 posts, read 1,606,149 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno View Post
Do you have a point you would like to make? You probably don't or can't.
I stated my point clearly;
You do not understand the topic you are attempting to discuss.

Perhaps you have a comprehension difficulties?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 07:25 PM
 
3,366 posts, read 1,606,149 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
Maybe the word "rights" as it is defined by a typical statist isn't the right way to describe the concept.
Because a typical statist can't wrap their heads around the idea that anything can happen outside of government.

But it exists nonetheless.

Natural rights don't need to be "enforced" to exist.

How about answering the question posed in the post you quoted:

In the absence of government, do you have a natural right to defend yourself against me if I try to attack you?

I'm not asking you if you have a right to succeed in defending yourself.....just that you have a right to try to defend yourself.
The "statist" mindset, that rights are allotted by government could be the issue, but his misunderstanding seems to be on a very fundamental level.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 07:45 PM
 
Location: San Jose
2,594 posts, read 1,241,335 times
Reputation: 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
But it exists nonetheless.
Rights exist as an abstract concept in the minds of humans. If all humans were wiped off the face of the earth by a giant comet. Where would rights go? Who would dictate what is and is not a "natural right"?


Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
How about answering the question posed in the post you quoted:

In the absence of government, do you have a natural right to defend yourself against me if I try to attack you?

I'm not asking you if you have a right to succeed in defending yourself.....just that you have a right to try to defend yourself.
I can believe I have a right to defend myself and die
I can believe I have a right to defend myself and live
I can believe I do not have the right to defend myself and die
I can believe I do not have the right to defend myself and live

Whatever option I choose seems to have zero impact on the end result.

Also since there is an absence of government or any human society there is no repercussions for my actions or beliefs. So what I believe is technically pointless to this premise.

Also your position requires an axiomatic belief in God for the question to make sense. I don't believe in God.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:32 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top