Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ebiskit
Wrong... Constitutionally, the rite to self-defense will trump personal property rites. There is a reason for it being the 2nd Amendment.

Do you believe that self-defense trumps property in all cases? In other words, do I not have the right to refuse someone entry to my property because I do not want them to be armed?

Do the same protections extend to the free speech rights of the 1st amendment? So that I would also not be allowed to deny entry to my property to someone holding or expressing beliefs I find repulsive?

26 posted on 06/28/2008 12:27:28 PM PDT by timm22 (Think critically)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: timm22; All

Wrong... Constitutionally, the rite to self-defense will trump personal property rites. There is a reason for it being the 2nd Amendment.
Do you believe that self-defense trumps property in all cases? In other words, do I not have the right to refuse someone entry to my property because I do not want them to be armed?
____

Do the same protections extend to the free speech rights of the 1st amendment? So that I would also not be allowed to deny entry to my property to someone holding or expressing beliefs I find repulsive?

____

Timm22

Bottom line is that it is Man’s God-given rite to ‘peaceably’ defend himself where ever he maybe. We have only been able to appropriately exercise this judicious use of force for the past 200-300 years thusly throwing off ‘most’ of the state’s yoke in addition to others whom by nature are compelled to oppress. If you chose not to properly defend yourself, that’s your unfettered prerogative. However, if I am ‘invited’ onto your property verbally by you or implicitly by way of a business, then you can be assured I will be able to appropriately defend myself since your invitation is more than likely open to nameless others in the community at large. That is an assumption I will defend just as my life. If I have no reason to be there in the first place, then as jesse jackson would put it, “The question is moot.”

As for the 1st, oddly enough, no. Nonetheless, the 2nd Amendment by its very nature is THE lynchpin not only to the Republic but as well to an open and civil society. Read John Lott’s “More Guns, Less Crime” and give the numbers a scant glance. I think it will be an illustrative exercise. Just remember, you’ll meet some of the the most polite at the range.

By the way, would you do MS-13 a big favor and put up a “Gun-Free-Zone” sign in your front yard?

No government has a monopoly on perpetuity. The 2nd is THE line we all man.

the Deets


27 posted on 06/28/2008 3:16:01 PM PDT by ebiskit (South Park Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: timm22

Critical enough for ya?...


28 posted on 06/28/2008 4:05:30 PM PDT by ebiskit (South Park Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson