Do You Own a Gun?

[Spexxvet]

And what about the article (that I can't find) about the three-month-old who owns a gun?

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

And what about the article (that I can't find) about the three-month-old who owns a gun?

The three month old does not own a gun, but was issued an Illinois Firearms Owner ID card ... all that means when the other legal requirements for gun ownership are met, he'll be able to apply to purchase a gun in that state.

There is a difference between "owning" and "using under supervision."

[monster]

I'm thinking that the legalese makes a distinction between ownership and possesion?

[Ibby]

No, Radar, I think she's right... It can't be an inherent human right you're born with but that kids don't have... thats a contradiction.

[Radar]

You have a right to life when you are born and with that comes the right to defend that life. Parent's are the guardians of their children until they reach the age of majority and as such, they hold all decision making powers, and decide whether or not it is appropriate for them to have guns or if the parent will exercise the right to defend their family.

So there is no contradiction. We have a right to own guns at birth, and until we have reached the age of majority, that right is either exercised or not by our parents.

When we reach the age of majority we take responsibility for our own life and our parents are no longer our guardians.

[Ibby]

We have a right to own guns at birth that we don't have the right to exercise ourselves?

Still not making sense to me, dude.

[Radar]

From the moment of your birth until the moment you reach the age of majority (Which is recognized as 18 in America) you are not really a person under the law. You are merely the chattel of your parents. You don't have any decision making authority or powers over your life. Your parents hold these powers for you until you reach the age of majority.

Your parents do not have the right to physically endanger you, but they do have the right to decide which of your rights they will allow you to exercise until you are the age of majority and are responsible for your own life and can make those decisions for yourself.

You have the right to own a gun at birth. Your parents decide whether or not you will be allowed to exercise that right.

Let's use someone else as an example other than a child to clear up the point.

If you are a prisoner, you are prevented from exercising certain rights like the right to go where you want, when you want. The warden of the prison will decide which of your rights you will be allowed to exercise while you're in the prison and which you will not. This doesn't mean you don't have the rights, just that you will not be allowed to exercise them. Once you get out of prison, you are able to choose for yourself when you will exercise your rights again.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Radar

From the moment of your birth until the moment you reach the age of majority (Which is recognized as 18 in America) you are not really a person under the law. You are merely the chattel of your parents. You don't have any decision making authority or powers over your life. Your parents hold these powers for you until you reach the age of majority.

Your parents do not have the right to physically endanger you, but they do have the right to decide which of your rights they will allow you to exercise until you are the age of majority and are responsible for your own life and can make those decisions for yourself.

You have the right to own a gun at birth. Your parents decide whether or not you will be allowed to exercise that right.

That's not what you inferred. Now you're saying that we have these rights, but aren't allowed to exercise them due to age. What else might be legitimate reasons for disallowing the exercising of rights? And what about the rights to life, liberty, and the pusuit of happiness (drinking alcohol)

Originally Posted by Radar

Let's use someone else as an example other than a child to clear up the point...

No, because your point was "from birth" not "from incarceration".

[Ibby]

So we have basic rights inherent to being a person but only if the government says you're old enough?

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Ibram

So we have basic rights inherent to being a person but only if the government says you're old enough?

No. You have rights regardless of whether or not there is a government, and you can only exercise which rights your parents allow until you live on your own...regardless of whether or not we have a government.

[Aliantha]

I have a philosophical question which I've thought about often while reading arguments about how it's unconstitutional to have restrictions on gun ownership.

If that is true, then what about all the other laws that restrict people from doing what they want? Some road rules. Smoking laws. Curfews. monopoly laws for business. There are so many situations where this argument can apply. I don't see how it's valid.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

I have a philosophical question which I've thought about often while reading arguments about how it's unconstitutional to have restrictions on gun ownership.

If that is true, then what about all the other laws that restrict people from doing what they want? Some road rules. Smoking laws. Curfews. monopoly laws for business. There are so many situations where this argument can apply. I don't see how it's valid.

Because we have the right to do whatever we want as long as our actions don't physically harm, endanger, or violate the property, person, or rights of non-consenting others.

Road rules are there for safety and to ensure that people do not endanger each other. Smoking laws are all wrong as are monopoly laws.

You have the right to shoot yourself up with Heroin. You do not have the right to drive a car on public roads while high on heroin, or fly a jet, work heavy machinery around other people, etc.

Merely owning guns does not harm or endanger others and those who claim otherwise are liars.

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by Radar

You have the right to shoot yourself up with Heroin.

How can you have this right when the very substance itself is illegal? Are you saying I have the right to illegal drugs?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Ringer's Paradox: it states, with considerable justice, that A freedom restricted is a freedom preserved.

In practice, laws of that kind are codified with the aim of preventing problems arising from exercising a freedom with absolutely no limitation whatsoever. The freedom to swing a fist ends where the other fellow's nose begins, and so forth. That is what Ringer's statement amounts to.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Ringer's Paradox: it states, with considerable justice, that A freedom restricted is a freedom preserved.

In practice, laws of that kind are codified with the aim of preventing problems arising from exercising a freedom with absolutely no limitation whatsoever. The freedom to swing a fist ends where the other fellow's nose begins, and so forth. That is what Ringer's statement amounts to.

So restricting guns (not that I endorse it) is an effort to preserve that freedom - cool!