I can’t say that Mark Alexander’s question surprised me, as I have spoken with many British and they all appear to be of like mind: no one has the right to resort to violence, not even in protecting one’s own life, or that of his family, or of his property. I suppose this is why a young guardsman was so horribly murdered in the middle of the day, in the middle of a street, and did not have the right of self-defense. What stymies me about this conundrum is that the entire notion of self-defense, as an inalienable right, comes to us from John Locke, who was British. I’ll take the arrogant juxtaposition and say that any government that does not recommend the right of self-defense, even if it requires the use of deadly force, is an illegal government. More than this, I would ask Mr. Alexander, what is this fascination you have with baring your throat to an assailant?
The questions premise did have an odd hypocrisy to it, didn't it? A citizen somehow doesn't have the right to use deadly force to protect oneself, but they require that the State have and use that very use of force to protect them.
And spot on with Locke. He posited that not only could this tenet be found in biblical law, but was a fundamental component of natural law as well.
Those across the Pond just don't get it about 2nd Amendment rights. In my experience, most of those from across the Pond who visit America stay in posh places, where they are very safe. The reality outside those gated resorts is not the same.
Off topic, but ...
ReplyDeleteExcellent program today on the Gathering Storm.
I can’t say that Mark Alexander’s question surprised me, as I have spoken with many British and they all appear to be of like mind: no one has the right to resort to violence, not even in protecting one’s own life, or that of his family, or of his property. I suppose this is why a young guardsman was so horribly murdered in the middle of the day, in the middle of a street, and did not have the right of self-defense. What stymies me about this conundrum is that the entire notion of self-defense, as an inalienable right, comes to us from John Locke, who was British. I’ll take the arrogant juxtaposition and say that any government that does not recommend the right of self-defense, even if it requires the use of deadly force, is an illegal government. More than this, I would ask Mr. Alexander, what is this fascination you have with baring your throat to an assailant?
The questions premise did have an odd hypocrisy to it, didn't it? A citizen somehow doesn't have the right to use deadly force to protect oneself, but they require that the State have and use that very use of force to protect them.
DeleteAnd spot on with Locke. He posited that not only could this tenet be found in biblical law, but was a fundamental component of natural law as well.
It was an excellent show.
ReplyDeleteThose across the Pond just don't get it about 2nd Amendment rights. In my experience, most of those from across the Pond who visit America stay in posh places, where they are very safe. The reality outside those gated resorts is not the same.
AOW, The UK is # 1 in Europe for personal attack crime and #2 in the WORLD, and yet they refuse to question their unarmed status.
DeleteUNreal. I'll never regard them as intelligent again unless they do.
And from talking to many there, it seems they view the entire United States as S. Chicago... Talk about stereotyping.
Agree
ReplyDelete