TFred
Regular Member
Alright, let's hash this one out. Pop some popcorn.
One of the biggest weaknesses of the RKBA movement is the unmerited worship of property rights. Many, if not most supporters of gun rights draw the line at the personal property boundary. "If they don't want my gun, then they won't get my money..." "I may disagree with their policy, but I will support to the death their right to ban my gun from their property..." Yeah, OK, that last one is a little bit sarcastic, but we all know it's not far off from how some people actually feel...
The problem is that this completely ignores the inherent wrong perpetrated by that property owner to deny another human individual the right to defense of life, a right that most of us claim to be "endowed by their Creator" ... yes, even an "unalienable Right."
Do we need to refresh our minds on the definition of unalienable? From Google: "Unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor."
So what's the deal with SB 1427? It's not about the right to keep and bear arms... but another right that is just as inherent to the human race, just as important, and an excellent example of what we, who claim to be gun-rights proponents, should be striving for:
This individual right will soon be protected by state law to exist "in any place where the mother is lawfully present."
I'll guarantee you that there do exist people in this world who find breastfeeding in public more offensive than a lawfully carried firearm. This bill passed both the House of Delegates and the Senate unanimously! Not one single vote against this bill which grossly intrudes upon the rights of property owners. How could that possibly happen? Is the breastfeeding lobby that much more powerful than VCDL, or the NRA?
"In any place where the citizen is lawfully present" should be the ultimate goal of every gun-rights organization, with only VERY few exceptions.
We all need to learn from this excellent bill, and understand what it really means to be a proponent of an "unalienable right."
TFred
One of the biggest weaknesses of the RKBA movement is the unmerited worship of property rights. Many, if not most supporters of gun rights draw the line at the personal property boundary. "If they don't want my gun, then they won't get my money..." "I may disagree with their policy, but I will support to the death their right to ban my gun from their property..." Yeah, OK, that last one is a little bit sarcastic, but we all know it's not far off from how some people actually feel...
The problem is that this completely ignores the inherent wrong perpetrated by that property owner to deny another human individual the right to defense of life, a right that most of us claim to be "endowed by their Creator" ... yes, even an "unalienable Right."
Do we need to refresh our minds on the definition of unalienable? From Google: "Unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor."
So what's the deal with SB 1427? It's not about the right to keep and bear arms... but another right that is just as inherent to the human race, just as important, and an excellent example of what we, who claim to be gun-rights proponents, should be striving for:
§ 32.1-370. Right to breastfeed.
A mother may breastfeed in any place where the mother is lawfully present, including any location where she would otherwise be allowed on property that is owned, leased, or controlled by the Commonwealth in accordance with § 2.2-1147.1.
A mother may breastfeed in any place where the mother is lawfully present, including any location where she would otherwise be allowed on property that is owned, leased, or controlled by the Commonwealth in accordance with § 2.2-1147.1.
This individual right will soon be protected by state law to exist "in any place where the mother is lawfully present."
I'll guarantee you that there do exist people in this world who find breastfeeding in public more offensive than a lawfully carried firearm. This bill passed both the House of Delegates and the Senate unanimously! Not one single vote against this bill which grossly intrudes upon the rights of property owners. How could that possibly happen? Is the breastfeeding lobby that much more powerful than VCDL, or the NRA?
"In any place where the citizen is lawfully present" should be the ultimate goal of every gun-rights organization, with only VERY few exceptions.
We all need to learn from this excellent bill, and understand what it really means to be a proponent of an "unalienable right."
TFred
Last edited by a moderator: