OT Natural Law Vattel to Locke Once the heart of Liberalism.

[MarAzul]

These individual rights men inherit as human beings, as in Natural law, once were embraced by the liberal of the day.
The right to defend oneself with arms is one of these rights. Madison's 2nd amendment did not invent the concept, it simply codify the right, as our right in the Constitution.

I read that the modern liberal is more in favor of internationalism today. But I do not understand the reasoning for giving up individual rights. My goodness, even the right to defend oneself?

Can anyone explain this with clear logic?


Other interesting reading.
https://theroadtoconcord.com/2014/0...atural-law-the-natural-right-to-self-defense/

Perhaps the failure to teach the young has more to do with it than anything else.
"* Richard Henry Lee: “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”

Today a young woman of 20, 120 pounds or so, has no right to defend herself with force of arms?
This is a most resent development, Completely new to our history. I really do not understand the logic?

 

[MarAzul]

Well shit!
Can you help me with Naval Architecture?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Well shit!
Can you help me with Naval Architecture?

A boat should be big enough to hold strawberries but not too big where someone could hide them from you.

 

[MarAzul]

A boat should be big enough to hold strawberries but not too big where someone could hide them from you.

Check!

 

[MarAzul]

Where is the paragon of Liberals, The teacher, the @riverman
with the clarity he should bring!

 

[barfo]

I'm a little unclear how guns are a natural right, given that guns don't occur in nature. It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Enfield.

barfo

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I'm a little unclear how guns are a natural right, given that guns don't occur in nature. It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Enfield.

barfo

Man created guns in god's image.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I'm a little unclear how guns are a natural right, given that guns don't occur in nature. It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Enfield.

barfo

Question of the Day: Do Gun Rights Come from God?

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...ion-of-the-day-do-gun-rights-come-from-god-2/

 

[MarAzul]

You must read,
But don't skip past Browning and colt.
Adam is not enough, Enfield is too far. You missed the essence.

 

[barfo]

Question of the Day: Do Gun Rights Come from God?

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...ion-of-the-day-do-gun-rights-come-from-god-2/

Luckily, the day is almost over. Hope tomorrow's question is more reality-based.

barfo

 

[rasheedfan2005]

Those who are willing to trade freedom for security deserve neither. The lesson is the ones providing for security are going to strip you of your freedom. Look at the movies about A.I. the machines always conclude that humans are self destructive and therefore must be controlled. Liberals want to control how everyone acts and thinks. They are the machines. They think they know best and should be able to force others into their way of thinking. instead of allowing men the freedom to choose which rights they will exercise.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

Those who are willing to trade freedom for security deserve neither. The lesson is the ones providing for security are going to strip you of your freedom. Look at the movies about A.I. the machines always conclude that humans are self destructive and therefore must be controlled. Liberals want to control how everyone acts and thinks. They are the machines. They think they know best and should be able to force others into their way of thinking. instead of allowing men the freedom to choose which rights they will exercise.

No, no no. You only got it half correct. Liberals want to tell you how to act, conservatives want to tell you how to think. We see a ton of examples every single day. You’re welcome for the clarification............

 

[riverman]

the liberal of the day.

Do you choose a different liberal everyday?

 

[riverman]

But I do not understand the reasoning for giving up individual rights.

sometimes individual rights are abused.....look at Afghanistan....if your daughter is raped, the family will throw stones at her and maybe even kill her because they believe it's their individual right.....some may want to give that right up.....if an 18 year old gets kicked out of school and comes back with a newly purchased AR15 and kills 18 people....you rethink the laws that contribute to the situation....clear logic...what is better for society in the long run takes sacrifices at times that challenge the status quo...but from what I've read...you're not really interested in questioning that...just questioning those who consider alternatives to the status quo.

 

[MarAzul]

Those who are willing to trade freedom for security deserve neither. The lesson is the ones providing for security are going to strip you of your freedom. Look at the movies about A.I. the machines always conclude that humans are self destructive and therefore must be controlled. Liberals want to control how everyone acts and thinks. They are the machines. They think they know best and should be able to force others into their way of thinking. instead of allowing men the freedom to choose which rights they will exercise.

Thank you sheed for weighing in with something on the subject. I thought the paragon of the teaching profession, @riverman would step up and teach, but I see, he his off defending the lack a ability in simpler issues brought to his attention by @Denny Crane.

I sort think at this point, the liberal agenda simply out weights the Constitution or any of the history behind it, at least in the liberal mind. It is more or less fuck the Constitution and that is my read. @Further comes the closest to intentionally implying the position.

 

[riverman]

I thought the paragon of the teaching profession, @riverman would step up and teach, but I see, he his off defending the lack a ability in simpler issues brought to his attention by @Denny Crane.

You want to keep tagging me as if I really care whether you respect my views....move on....you're certainly a clickish old fart looking for a cheerleader.....

 

[stampedehero]

If we revisited the colonies in the late 1700's, we can observe a entirely different world. Human rights regarding a man's right to bear arms was dictated by lawlessness, insane numbers of animals, the white person's distrust of any race besides his own and the expectation you would live a short life. The Constitution was written for a class of privileged white men excluding women, immigrants, slaves and others that white men considered worthless. In fact, raiding parties from neighboring States was a hidden atrocity. New York vandals would invade North Jersey. Men had to ban together to ensure they had access to crude flint lock weapons. The British were entirely cruel and considered themselves above all the colonist population.
Whoever wrote that opinion about modern liberalism yearning for internationalist status is saying nothing but his theory. People in this country are not going to give up individual rights. The government can take rights away but the individual fights for what they were granted or doesn't become involved in the subject due to their laziness. We all have a right to defend ourselves but it is packaged within the parameters of how far a person travels away from what they own and how the law would be enforced.

 

[MarAzul]

you rethink the laws that contribute to the situation....clear logic

Oh I have rethought the logic.
I do not see hundreds of years of history as the problem. The Problem was created very recent, much more recent than the introduction of the AR-15
in 1959. And the problem was enabled even more recent with the introduction of the Kill Zones in 1991.

I really like to see problems addressed not agenda's.

 

[MarAzul]

If we revisited the colonies in the late 1700's, we can observe a entirely different world. Human rights regarding a man's right to bear arms was dictated by lawlessness, insane numbers of animals, the white person's distrust of any race besides his own and the expectation you would live a short life. The Constitution was written for a class of privileged white men excluding women, immigrants, slaves and others that white men considered worthless. In fact, raiding parties from neighboring States was a hidden atrocity. New York vandals would invade North Jersey. Men had to ban together to ensure they had access to crude flint lock weapons. The British were entirely cruel and considered themselves above all the colonist population.
Whoever wrote that opinion about modern liberalism yearning for internationalist status is saying nothing but his theory. People in this country are not going to give up individual rights. The government can take rights away but the individual fights for what they were granted or doesn't become involved in the subject due to their laziness. We all have a right to defend ourselves but it is packaged within the parameters of how far a person travels away from what they own and how the law would be enforced.

Thank you for weighing in sir! I do not know if we agree, but at least we speaking on the same subject.

 

[MarAzul]

You want to keep tagging me as if I really care whether you respect my views....move on....you're certainly a clickish old fart looking for a cheerleader.....

Heavy man, very heavy.

 

[stampedehero]

Thank you for weighing in sir! I do not know if we agree, but at least we speaking on the same subject.

Mar: What is internationalism? Is this the global decree that countries are controlled by the richest corporations or select individuals. The Vanderburg group that Jesse Ventura has fear of may just be that group.

 

[MarAzul]

Liberals want to tell you how to act, conservatives want to tell you how to think.

Ah! But you see, your point is sort of my point in posting this thread. There was a day when the Liberal was telling us how to think! And that was the same message that conservatives want to think today! What happened?

 

[stampedehero]

Oh I have rethought the logic.
I do not see hundreds of years of history as the problem. The Problem was created very recent, much more recent than the introduction of the AR-15
in 1959. And the problem was enabled even more recent with the introduction of the Kill Zones in 1991.

I really like to see problems addressed not agenda's.

Are not agenda's set forth to hinder solutions?

 

[stampedehero]

Man created guns in god's image.

That picture is offending. Instead, I could see Pontius Pilot pointing it at JC.

 

[MarAzul]

Mar: What is internationalism? Is this the global decree that countries are controlled by the richest corporations or select individuals. The Vanderburg group that Jesse Ventura has fear of may just be that group.

Oh I think you ask the wrong fellow. I am not sure at all. As I can only piece it together a little at a time as it becomes visible.
Maybe internationalism and Globalism are the same, not even sure of that.

But it appears Nationalism in any form, is not good. Including a Constitution codifying the law of a single nation, especially when it has code that sets it apart from other nations. But it is all murky to me, not clear at all.

 

[MarAzul]

Are not agenda's set forth to hinder solutions?

I sure hate to thinks so. But in this case, I am not so sure. Dividing issue are, sometimes useful.

 

[stampedehero]

Oh I think you ask the wrong fellow. I am not sure at all. As I can only piece it together a little at a time as it becomes visible.
Maybe internationalism and Globalism are the same, not even sure of that.

But it appears Nationalism in any form, is not out. Including a Constitution codifying the law of a single nation, especially when it has code that sets it apart from other nations. But it is all murky to me, not clear at all.

That is precisely my point about the author who quoted "Internationalism". I believe that the two entities are the same. Internationalism/globalism denies individual rights and promotes it's own "agenda". In simple terms, when fuel became ridiculously high, we, as individuals suffered. Speculators in the financial markets spoon feed off Globalism.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

Thank you sheed for weighing in with something on the subject. I thought the paragon of the teaching profession, @riverman would step up and teach, but I see, he his off defending the lack a ability in simpler issues brought to his attention by @Denny Crane.

I sort think at this point, the liberal agenda simply out weights the Constitution or any of the history behind it, at least in the liberal mind. It is more or less fuck the Constitution and that is my read. @Further comes the closest to intentionally implying the position.

For a guy so tied to the Constitution, how the hell you can YOU expect others to respect YOUR Second Amendment rights when you are so disrespectful and dismissive of THEIR First Amendment rights? I would assume since the right of free speech was addressed first, it takes primacy over the right to bear arms. When you dismiss the opinions of others out of hand you can’t be surprised or disappointed if/when they do the same to you......

 

[riverman]

Ah! But you see, your point is sort of my point in posting this thread. There was a day when the Liberal was telling us how to think! And that was the same message that conservatives want to think today! What happened?

moderates happened...and thoughts are not black and white concerning any given issue......what's happening now is that we have to process news feeds minute by minute instead of reading the Sunday paper once a week....people talk about issues that they used to avoid in public situations....politics and religion. My father and his friends gathered to play horseshoes, talk about the weather and baseball....it was understood your vote was a personal thing and not a constant point of contention. Labeling is divisive and mostly counter productive..now, it's what news seems to be....Hatfields and McCoys.....I have tried at length to discuss some of these issues but in your case....anyone who doesn't trust the president or subscribe to his methods is a traitor.....I think that's where you and I lost any conversation....when you accused me of sedition for disliking the president...that's not a liberal telling you how to think, that's a liberal telling you how they think

 

[MarAzul]

That is precisely my point about the author who quoted "Internationalism". I believe that the two entities are the same. Internationalism/globalism denies individual rights and promotes it's own "agenda". In simple terms, when fuel became ridiculously high, we, as individuals suffered. Speculators in the financial markets spoon feed off Globalism.

Very good point. We the people are very vulnerable in this environment as we have no represenetives in positions of power, no global system.
Our Constitution only extends to us, the commerce clause has no affect in the Global world.

I notice it big time went trying to plan a boat trip, I can carry weapon to protect my boat, and self here, but damn near no where else. Every where else, you must remain vulnerable to the fucking pirates or they take your weapons. Often jail you. It makes for a crappy world. I do not want to see this country join with that one, where their model is the new norm.