Random thought of the day

Having a government agency to control and regulate firearms in light of the Second Amendment is like having a government agency to control and regulate people with black skin in light of the 13th Amendment.

This isn’t to say that the use of firearms should be unregulated. You still could, and should, be punished for causing harm to innocent people or the property of others regardless of the means by which you caused the harm.

3 thoughts on “Random thought of the day

  1. “This isn’t to say that the use of firearms should be unregulated. You still could, and should, be punished for causing harm to innocent people or the property of others regardless of the means by which you caused the harm.”

    That’s not a restriction on firearms. It is a prohibition against rights violations. One has nothing to do with the other except that a restriction on firearms is a violation of a right or rights.

    And be careful of your wording. “Causing harm” to another person could be as innocent as going into business in competition with someone, or buying the land adjacent to someone’s property and building a house on it, thus “harming” their enjoyment of their own property.

    It’s all about whether or not you (or more often, the government) are violating someone else’s rights. The issue of harm verses benefit, outside the context of rights, is secondary or tertiary, or is, properly, completely outside the purview of government.

    Practically ALL of what we dicsuss day in and day out in the realm of politics and society comes down to one very simple question;
    Are someone’s rights being violated?
    If so; by whom? Punish them. If not, there is no cause, and no right, to intervene with government force of any kind.

  2. @Lyle, I was not clear. And you are correct.

    What I meant to say, but left it too obscure, was that “regulate the use” in the context of a firearm means same as regulating the use of fists, feet, matches, sticks, and stones.

    When put in that context then it is much easier for people to see that prohibiting firearms from being carried in public is little different than requiring people to be handcuffed in public.

Comments are closed.