On The Third Hand

Monday, 25 Feb

Rights and freedoms [permalink]

My problem (and why I'm a bit persnickety about allowing potential terrorists any rights) is that the Federal/State/Local governments are denying me my right to self-defense. Just on a local level, if someone decides to break into my house, I do have the right here to shoot him/her. But I have to wait until the person is inside the house, and to be perfectly safe from being prosecuted for murder, I also have to wait until they are between me and any reasonably quick exit. (Used to be that a woman could fire through a door, but someone decided that was sexual discrimination. It was, but they should have let men fire through the door too.)

I can also, with proper permit, carry a concealed gun with me if I go downtown (carrying one openly is iffy). So, if someone tries to mug me, I can wave a gun at them. Only problem is that there is a law against firing a gun within the city limits. No "anti-gun law there, you can carry a gun -- it's only illegal to fire it.

So, as a law-abiding citizen, I am not permitted to defend myself except in limited situations. However, criminals and terrorists are permitted to do almost anything they want -- right up until they attack -- and if I'm lucky, I might be in a place where I can legally defend myself or others when they do. If not, I have the choice between death and jail. It's likely that in a terrorist situation, I'd never be charged (muggers or rapists -- iffy). But I have to depend on the kindness of the state to not put me in jail for self defense. So, I'm just a teensy bit more bellicose than I would be if I were not being denied my rights.
Start or join a forum discussion

Fine lines and slippery slopes [permalink]

In reaction to my post yesterday on religious intolerance, Alex Knapp of Heretical Ideas has pointed out (correctly) that: "Freedom of speech includes the freedom to advocate illegal acts, no matter what their nature."

<smartarse mode on> I'd like to point out that what I was doing was exercising my own right to freedom of speech and advocating the illegal act of removing the freedom of speech from those who would like to convince others to kill me or put me in purdah (or the Christian reconstructionist equivalent).<smartarse mode off>

I also said "Depending on which laws they violate...". I'm aware that we really can't violate their freedom of speech without amending or ignoring the constitution (not that a lot of it isn't being ignored already), but I'm sure we can find something they are doing that is illegal.
Start or join a forum discussion