|
I'll give you all the philosophical grounding from which we should be able to own any type of gun we fucking want.
1. (a) You own your body and (b) property you've gained via original appropriation or voluntary exchange.
2. In regards to (a), this is irrefutable, even if you assert that you do not own your body. The act of using your body to communicate that you don't own it, is a performative contradiction. Each of us owns our body, and (b) property.
3. With property rights established above, the non-aggression axiom is validated. The non-aggression axiom is the recognition that it's wrong to initiate or threaten the initiation of force against a person or their property.
^- Points 1, 2 and 3 therefore legitamize owning anything as long as it does not break #3 from above (The non-aggression axiom, sometimes referred to as the NAP [non-aggression principle]) -- because the act of simply owning an object, is not a violation of the NAP.
This is why any "crimes" that are based on victimless activities are null. Whether it's owning weapons, using or selling drugs, prostitution; it's all victimless and therefore should be permissible.
The point at which a person threatens or initiates force against someone, they've broken the NAP and action should be taken against them.
So again.
(a) A person owns a gun.
(b) A person owns a gun and threatens or uses it to injure someone.
(a) is okay.
(b) is not.
I understand most of you have undergone 13+ years of government indoctrination centers as youngsters, and have watched enough mainstream mind-numbing media that it can make this type of logic difficult to process. But for christ's sake, it's time to put our big boy pants on.
|