Is self-defense of your person/life a guaranteed right?

Do you agree with the bolded portion of the OP?

  • YES! Everyone should be allowed to defend themselves efficiently

  • NO, i think only the wealthy should be allowed to defend themselves efficiently.


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,452
2
0
Most would agree that self defense against assault against your person is a right everyone should have. I think we should have a subsidy for poor people to have the most efficient way of defending themselves against asailants. Especially women who are at a evolutionary disadvantage.

Therefore I propose that every citizen receives a gun from the US government. If it's a right, i suppose the american people should pay for it, just like healthcare and welfare. It should be easy enough to pay for a program by simply implementing a federal sales tax of 4%. Everyone 18 years old or older in america under the poverty line will receive a tax rebate to allow them to purchase a gun of up to $500, 4 boxes of appropriate ammunition and 8 hours of range time to practice. Think of how much we would save in the long run if everyone could protect themselves.

Please think of the children. If you're against this you probably think that all women WANT to be raped and that poor people deserve to get beaten senseless because they can't defend themselves. If we are to progress as a society we need to pitch in and look out for eachother. It's for the greater good. Why are only the wealthy allowed to defend themselves because of the high price of firearms? It's not fair to those who weren't born into economic means.
 

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
Or we could have a mandatory 2 year service after high school, you get issued a service rifle and handgun that you keep afterwards . .This would actually address many more societal problems as well imo.
 
Last edited:

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
Only the wealthy should have access to firearms. Look at the rates of criminality amongst CHL holders in states with very high fees (TX, NY) vs states with very low fees (LA, AL.) Increasing the costs of owning and carrying guns keeps them out of the hands of the people who are most likely to use them incorrectly, or criminally.

Virtually all gun control laws are founded in racism or classism, and for good reason.
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,452
2
0
Can't tell if serious or satire.

everything that is a 'right' should be provdided by the government. Therefore, since self defense is a right and firearms are the most efficient way of protecting yourself, by extension it should be provided by the government.
 
Sep 7, 2009
12,960
3
0
Read up on natural rights vs legal rights.

Self defense is a natural right. The government has nothing to do with it.
 

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
Right because the only mitigating factors in comparing TX and NY to LA and AL are the fees.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
24,222
10,877
136
Could we load the question more, this one isn't quite loaded enough for my tastes.

Sad attempt to prove to prove a point. But, in my opinion that's all that needs to be in the constitution. The right to self defense.
 

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
Problems arise when the government disagrees with you as to what your 'natural rights' are however.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
Poll is silly and presents a false dilemma. If you want to make a point, make your point. Don't make a poll to make a point.
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
31
91
Why would you think it would take a 4% sales tax to pay for a gun? That would average to an income of ~$2000/yr per household.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.