Limiting rights because of the actions of the tiny minority

See OP

  • Limiting the gun rights of the law abiding is acceptable

    Votes: 2 6.1%
  • Limiting the religious rights of the law abiding is acceptable

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Both are acceptable

    Votes: 4 12.1%
  • Neither is acceptable

    Votes: 27 81.8%

  • Total voters
    33
Dear M14S (no relation to MS13 I hope)
If the First and Second Amendments are enforced consistently with
themselves and the rest of the Bill of Rights/Constitution,
then these laws naturally "limit" or CHECK THEMSELVES.

so yes, it does make sense to have limits on rights and freedoms,
since these cannot be abused to violate the rights and freedoms of others
which is a form of limitation.

the First Amendment also includes the right of the people
peaceably to assemble and to petition for redress of grievances.
So this checks the free exercise of religion, free speech and press,
where you cannot abuse these freedoms to disrupt the peace
and obstruct due process of people to petition to resolve grievances.

And the Second Amendment refers to a well-regulated militia.
Even the police and military must be sworn to uphold and DEFEND
the Constitution, so should all citizens bearing arms be equally
committed to using arms for DEFENSE and not for abuse or violation of laws.

That is a form of restriction, to make it illegal to use firearms to commit crimes or abuses.

So yes, it is natural and necessary by the spirit of the laws and Constitution
as social contracts based on "consent of the governed" as authority of law
and just government, that there are limits to religious freedom and gun rights.

The laws check and balance themselves, so if you refuse responsibility for enforcing and
following the laws, then no, you should not be able to claim rights and freedom under these laws.

Do you believe it is constitutionally/legally/conceptually/morally acceptable to...

...Limit the gun rights of law-abiding citizens because a negligible minority might shoot up a theater?
...Limit the religious rights of law-abiding muslims because a negligible minority might fly an airliner into a skyscraper?

If you believe one is acceptable but not the other, please explain, in detail the difference.

=== EDIT===

Thus far, the only person to admit having a (typically liberal) double standard on this issue is Nosmo King:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...tions-of-the-tiny-minority-7.html#post5684662

I added his response to the poll as he did not have the courage to do so.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top