Quote:
|
Briefly, thus: you have those rights, human, civil, or however characterized, that despite any degree of force, fraud, injustice or propaganda militated against them, you yourself can enforce.
|
Briefly, bullshit.
You and I have rights, irrespective of how well-strapped we are, not, *emphatically not* because either of us is armed. We enjoy those rights because of our shared respect for our rule of law.
Having a gun does not grant you any rights, it doesn't even protect your rights. Only that shared respect for law protects you and your rights. When you lose those rights, when they've been stolen from you by violence, the gun hasn't saved you, and if that violence came from the muzzle of a gun, it was the lack of respect for the rule of law that created the opening through which they were lost.
No amount of firepower "you yourself" can muster can "enforce" your rights. Somewhere, someone has a bigger gun and smaller scruples. Where is your puny <strike>gun</strike> god now? Your rights, and mine, are like the right of way at stop sign. You can't seize the right of way, you can only have it yielded to you. If you assert and I assert, only conflict results. I suppose this is where you draw and fire; win! Unless I draw first.
Maybe you really don't understand that such a dispute over rights is solvable, only solvable by laws. If so, hit the books, you have a lot of catching up to do. If you're really just pretending, then your willful ignorance is the problem you need to address first.