South African police shoot dead striking miners
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
great contribution....
When people with clubs, shovels, etc., advance on policemen who are armed with guns, somebody is going
to get shot. It can hardly be called "murder".
Let's all of the forum's 2d Amendment advocates chip in and buy a few of these for those strikers:
I mean after all, the government is not suppose to be shooting at people and that's what the Amendment was supposed to stop.
Isn't strange how so many forum right wingers condemn gun control, defend the 2d Amendment, but when challenged to actually apply it they go silent. The right of self defense against government intrusionism should be universal - in fact our Founding Fathers called it a natural right. I see no reason why it should be restricted in any way and denied to those unfortunates in RSA.
I mean after all, the government is not suppose to be shooting at people and that's what the Amendment was supposed to stop.
Isn't strange how so many forum right wingers condemn gun control, defend the 2d Amendment, but when challenged to actually apply it they go silent. The right of self defense against government intrusionism should be universal - in fact our Founding Fathers called it a natural right. I see no reason why it should be restricted in any way and denied to those unfortunates in RSA.
Let's all of the forum's 2d Amendment advocates chip in and buy a few of these for those strikers:
I mean after all, the government is not suppose to be shooting at people and that's what the Amendment was supposed to stop.
Isn't strange how so many forum right wingers condemn gun control, defend the 2d Amendment, but when challenged to actually apply it they go silent. The right of self defense against government intrusionism should be universal - in fact our Founding Fathers called it a natural right. I see no reason why it should be restricted in any way and denied to those unfortunates in RSA.
I must have done a Rip Van Winkle. I didn't even know we now have a constitution much less amendments to it.
Let's all of the forum's 2d Amendment advocates chip in and buy a few of these for those strikers:
I mean after all, the government is not suppose to be shooting at people and that's what the Amendment was supposed to stop.
Isn't strange how so many forum right wingers condemn gun control, defend the 2d Amendment, but when challenged to actually apply it they go silent. The right of self defense against government intrusionism should be universal - in fact our Founding Fathers called it a natural right. I see no reason why it should be restricted in any way and denied to those unfortunates in RSA.
Another strange post. Like real strange.
Why you think that a US supporter of the US 2nd Amendment should buy self-propelled artillery for striking South African miners is beyond reason.
Well, why have Constitutional rights if they cannot be exercised? I want people all over the world to have the same rights we have. As I have written on another thread, we the people have the right to keep the government from engaging in tyranny against us - this is why our Founders gave us the 2d Amendment. If it were not for it, we would have had hundreds of Kent State incidents.
All should have that same protection as government all too often is not willing to give it. The Anglo-Saxon common law was used in South Africa before the tyrannical apartheid regime was imposed. People should have the same right of self defense there as in North America. To say otherwise is far worse than ridiculous.
All should have that same protection as government all too often is not willing to give it. The Anglo-Saxon common law was used in South Africa before the tyrannical apartheid regime was imposed. People should have the same right of self defense there as in North America. To say otherwise is far worse than ridiculous.
But we're talking about S. Africa here. What makes you think that proponents of gun rights are in support of miners charging police with clubs and machetes in another country? What makes you think we'd HAVE to support a mob against police or a government... even our own?
We don't have to support them - in fact I was being a bit sarcastic. But I do support the right of people to defend themselves against government tyranny. Note my post on another thread dealing with the right to bear arms. And remember that South Africa was under the Anglo Saxon common law before tyrannical Apartheid was imposed. Bearing in mind that the right to keep and bear arms was thought by our Founders to be a foundational principle, an eternal LAW, one ordained by God or by Nature's God ~ this means that South Africans should have always had that right as well because their rights originated under the common law as well. Principles are universal, not matters of convenience or expediency. Principles apply today as they did in the times of Jefferson or of Cicero.
As our Founders said, government and the law were created to promote the common welfare, not the corporate welfare. The SA police were protecting the interests of those mine owners when, in principle as government agents, they are supposed to be protecting people's rights.
Well, whatever happens next, let's hope justice will prevail in that troubled country.