()pen(arry
Regular Member
My view is that driving a car is a privilege, and can be licensed, and your license can be revoked. Keeping and bearing arms is NOT a privilege - it's a natural right, and rights are not revocable, therefore licensing or establishing a fee structure in order to restrict/control a right is unconstitutional.
Whence cometh a "natural" right to keep and bear arms, whence cometh not a right to drive? Guns and cars are both instruments of man, and rather recent at that. Did this "natural" right to keep and bear arms spring forth from the bosom of nothingness in 13th century China? That would be a peculiar sort of irony.
Well, I have a nit with that. Driving is also a natural right. The difference is that infringement of that right by the government is not prohibited by the constitution.
Rights are also revocable. The constitution provides that a person can be deprived of rights through due process.
I don't believe you understand what "right" means. A right is not a protected privilege. A right is an inherent condition that is inextricably coincident with the existence of the individual. It cannot be granted, and it cannot be taken away. It begins simultaneously with the beginning of the human creature, persists without cessation or pause, and ends simultaneously with the human creature's final demise. Rights are manifestations of the fundamental condition of liberty that inheres in all people, no matter their particulars or circumstances, and, as such, a right is possessed simply by existing, with no possibility of loss by any justification or through any means. A right is. Period. Rights are routinely violated, infringed, suppressed, and trodden over by governments and individuals alike, but never, ever can they be taken away, nor relinquished.
What can happen is that a right can be superseded by justice. One who infringes the right of another may virtuously be brought to recompensory justice, which narrowly and finitely supersedes such subset of the rights of the one as is strictly necessary to delivery that justice. This does not negate, much less revoke, the rights of the one; it simply takes precedence within the specific scope of justice dispensed.
So when you say, "infringement of that right by the government is not prohibited by the constitution," and, "rights are also revocable," please understand that you are speaking utter nonsense.