Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Aged 16-25? Share your experience of using the discussion boards and receive a £25 voucher! Take part via text-chat, video or phone. Click here to find out more and to take part.
Options

Universal rights?

2

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by monocrat
    My opinion isn't fact. :)

    Drink driving is wrong because of potential harm caused. I think only ACTUAL harm from drink driving should be prosecuted.


    Drink driving is illegal to prevent potential harm. What do you suggest we do? Legalise it, watch as the death rate on the roads soars then ban it again?
    Idiot.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No I think that only incidents of drink driving that harm someone should be prosecuted against.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by monocrat
    My notions aren't stupid at all.
    Yes they are, they are unfeasible in the real world.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I doubt it.

    The only reason people oppose gun ownership is because it scares them.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by monocrat
    I doubt it.

    The only reason people oppose gun ownership is because it scares them.
    What a load of rubbish. They oppose the ownership of guns because there is no logical reason to own a gun. You have said you think ownsership should be legal but you have not proved that there is a purpose for them, except to kill and injure.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That's is nonsense.

    It's an issue of freedom. People should be free to own guns.
    The Code of Human Rights is intended to be universal, and has been written with the intention of covering every conceivable circumstance.

    Didn't I say it was intended to be universal already?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by monocrat

    Didn't I say it was intended to be universal already?
    Yes, and I agreed with that part - that human rights are intended to be universal - hence the accenting of 'is'. I then followed up by explaining that they aren't universal because they haven't been ratified by many countries. You need to read the whole message (or at least quote it).
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by BumbleBee
    What a load of rubbish. They oppose the ownership of guns because there is no logical reason to own a gun. You have said you think ownsership should be legal but you have not proved that there is a purpose for them, except to kill and injure.

    I think a person should be able to own anything as long as they don't violate another's rights. This includes gun ownership.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by monocrat
    I think a person should be able to own anything as long as they don't violate another's rights. This includes gun ownership.
    Yet again you avoid the question. Please answer the question.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by monocrat
    I think a person should be able to own anything as long as they don't violate another's rights. This includes gun ownership.

    But you surely own a live gun to use it? Therefore there is a large risk that it will infringe another human beings right to life it is used - hence it should be banned.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So, if we follow your theory, I can do anything I want as long as it doesn't violate your rights, or those of another person?

    Which rights are these? Human rights or rights granted by law? Because if you are referring to rights granted by law, then it is my right to live in a society where gun ownership is illegal. If you own one, then you violate my right.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by BumbleBee
    So, if we follow your theory, I can do anything I want as long as it doesn't violate your rights, or those of another person?

    Yes.
    Which rights are these? Human rights or rights granted by law? Because if you are referring to rights granted by law, then it is my right to live in a society where gun ownership is illegal. If you own one, then you violate my right.

    Non sequitur.

    If there is a statute allowing gun ownership, then there is nothing you can do to stop people owning guns.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by BumbleBee
    Yes they are, they are unfeasible in the real world.

    And yours are not?

    Tell me how is freedom a negative notion?

    How is respecting another's rights a negative notion?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by kevlar85
    But you surely own a live gun to use it? Therefore there is a large risk that it will infringe another human beings right to life it is used

    Only if it's used to kill. If not, there is no evident problem in my eyes.

    - hence it should be banned.

    Heck should it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by monocrat
    Only if it's used to kill. If not, there is no evident problem in my eyes.


    Heck should it.

    The whole point of a gun is to kill someone, if you use a gun against another person it has the effect of injuring/killing them that's the whole point. Therefore by your own admission it infringes the other persons rights and therefore should be banned.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well if you use a gun to shoot someone then yes.

    I have never said that you should here.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by monocrat
    Well if you use a gun to shoot someone then yes.

    I have never said that you should here.

    The whole point of a gun is to kill or injure someone - that is what it was designed for. When you fire it a little flag doesn't come out saying "BANG!" on it, what comes out of a gun is a little metal bullet travelling at speeds fast enough to at best cause severe harm to a human or at worst kill them. Therefore it is patently obvious that they should be banned.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    :lol:

    I can just imagine you now, with your political theory books open.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by monocrat
    Well if you use a gun to shoot someone then yes.

    I have never said that you should here.

    Well why the fuck carry a gun????

    gawd your a fucking nutter mate !!!!!!!!!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So do you think people should be allowed to just have guns do you? Just up there, hanging on the wall?


    To be honest, I see nothing wrong with people owning a gun.... as long as they don't have any bullets to put into it. Like Chris Rock once said, make bullets $5000 and there will be far less gun crime.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Guns should only be allowed if the people are members of a gun club, members of the public should not be allowed to access to guns.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by BeckyBoo
    Guns should only be allowed if the people are members of a gun club
    ... and leave their guns at the club when they've finished their shooting.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    monocrat, who should decide what our "universal rights" should be? Remember that the UN Charter covers most of this already.

    Who should enforce that they are maintained because the UN clearly doesn't?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by BumbleBee
    So do you think people should be allowed to just have guns do you? Just up there, hanging on the wall?

    Yes.

    To be honest, I see nothing wrong with people owning a gun.... as long as they don't have any bullets to put into it. Like Chris Rock once said, make bullets $5000 and there will be far less gun crime.

    That makes no sense. You need bullets in order to use a gun.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by BumbleBee
    :lol:

    I can just imagine you now, with your political theory books open.

    Actually my view on gun ownership is based on my 'political theory'.

    I NEVER follow what society has to say.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    ... and leave their guns at the club when they've finished their shooting.

    Heck no.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by BeckyBoo
    Guns should only be allowed if the people are members of a gun club, members of the public should not be allowed to access to guns.

    I believe they should.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Heck yes.
    Originally posted by Bumblebee
    To be honest, I see nothing wrong with people owning a gun.... as long as they don't have any bullets to put into it. Like Chris Rock once said, make bullets $5000 and there will be far less gun crime.
    Monocrat's response:
    That makes no sense. You need bullets in order to use a gun.

    And those bullets will pierce someone's body and kill them. But that is something that seems to have flown other your head.

    You make me laugh monocrat you really do.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You people have even said guns can be used at gun clubs.

    Tell me when have I even stated that guns should be used to kill others?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No but what you keep avoiding- because it utterly demolishes your argument- is that the only use for guns is to kill people. And since killing people is illegal then there is no point or issue about "the right" to own a gun.

    The same pretty much applies to the principle of owning a nuclear weapon (which incredibly you also argue for). The notion that "it's okay to own it if you're not going to use it" it's completely ridiculous and invalid, and you know it.
Sign In or Register to comment.