Thread: Protesting Confiscation Events

Originally Posted by ebf

Sasquatch, if it was an inalienable right (ala Mruka) we would not be having this discussion...
If you can point me to such a "right" in the Arms Act or the Interpretation Act, I will eat my gnome hat

I think it goes to something a lot more fundamental and so obvious we don't even see it, namely (warning: controversial) our inalienable right to self defense.

Even American 2nd amendment proponents will admit the 2nd amendment of their constitution did not institute the right to bear arms, but rather recognised the pre-existing right, i.e. it stated the right "should not be taken away" rather than their founders inventing a brand new right (don't ask me to quote exactly).

Without weapons/arms etc. only the strong (mainly men) have the prerogative of self defense, weapons are in effect the great leveller.

Disclaimer: I own my weapons for fun, not for self defense, but the above I do hold to be self-evident.



On a little sub edit, the right of self defense is not self-evident to US justice, heard of someone getting done for resisting arrest insofar that he insisted on holding up his hands to cover his head as the police baton strikes came raining down...