imported post
Flyer22 wrote:
For somebody who seems to be otherwise sensible, you have an amazingly hard time understanding that legality is not the end-all, be-all of human existence. You clearly think that just because something is legal automaticallymeans that it's moral, smart, and proper. But since my words and metaphors don't seem to get through to you, I will let other people do my talking.
You can find all these quotes, and others, and this site.
http://www.quotegarden.com/justice.html
"This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice." ~Oliver Wendell Holmes,Jr.
"Justice is incidental to law and order." ~John Edgar Hoover
"Although the legal and ethical definitions of right are the antithesis of each other, most writers use them as synonyms. They confuse power with goodness, and mistake law for justice." ~Charles T. Sprading, Freedom and its Fundamentals
"It's strange that men should take up crime when there are so many legal ways to be dishonest." ~Author unknown, quoted in Sunshine magazine
"Law never made men a whit more just." ~Henry David Thoreau
There will always be fundamental differences between what is deemed to be "acceptable" by man. Even the very definition of "justice" will change, depending on who you talk to.
In fact, it is this extremely liberal translation of law, that has allowed our right to be usurped for years. The very concept you are referring to is the cause for so much anguish in this, and many other countries. If you believe that interpretation is up to the judge, and that the term "Justice" is somehow universal, then the following would never have been recognized in the end, because it could have all been rationalized away by somebody with differing values than you:
Black people with equal rights.
Women voting.
Freedom of speech.
Right to keep and bear arms.
(Oh wait, aren't we still having this out with people who have irrational fear of firearms on a national level, and therefore are inhibiting to our rights on the basis of "morality" and "Justice"? Yes. Yes we are.)
The only way to offer fair equality to every man, is to eliminate massive sway of opinion from the process. Claiming to be the end all point of what defines morality or justice, makes you no better than Mao, Kim Jong, etc. Indeed, I claim no absolute understanding of everything myself, but I like to make the best decision I can for myself, and BY myself.
By overwhelmingly blanketing people with my opinion, I am sure to win no productive insight. By being fearful of everything another human being does while practicing their rights, I realize that I am doing nothing but regulating theirs.
I realize more than anything now, after so many few years, that I cannot inhibit the rights of others simply on a basis of convenience, or a difference of opinion. You truly have to sit and analyze the right as a whole. The framers did not sit and say, "Gee what's good for meeee,...hrmmm...". They had to reflect ideas externally, and realize that there truly
is finite rights that apply to every human being.
Whenever you apply rules to a right that is not to be infringed upon, regardless of whether you think it is "socially acceptable", you are the shining example of hypocrisy if you indeed claim to support the concept of the "right" itself.
I am not saying that the "
Open Carry movement" does not have it's place, but for those of you thinking this is as far as it needs to go, keep in mind that by absolute definition you truly do not support the right.
By catering to those with ideologies that would trample it, you do NOT support the right. In fact, you are assisting with the regulatory process.
Does kwiks actions reflect the meaning of the 2nd Amendment? Yes. Absolutely.
Were kwiks actions legal? Yes. Absolutely.
Did "Social Acceptance" play a role in his detainment? Yes. Absolutely.
Does "social acceptance" prohibit and improperly regulate a right? Yes. Absolutely.
As I have stated many times before, if you believe "social acceptance" SHOULD be a prohibiting factor, then may the "social acceptance" of another group or individual impede your finite rights.
Here. I have added some of my own quotes, since we are attempting to set a precedent:
"I don't believe in quotas. America was founded on a philosophy of individual rights, not group rights."
-Clarence Thomas
"You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free."
-Clarence Darrow
"The really valuable thing in the pageant of human life seems to me not the State but the creative, sentient individual, the personality; it alone creates the noble and the sublime. . ."
-Albert Einstein
"There's only one corner of the universe you can be certain of improving, and that's your own self."
-Aldous Huxley
"Civilization can only revive when there shall come into being in a number of individuals a new tone of mind, independent of the prevalent one among the crowds, and in opposition to it -- a tone of mind which will gradually win influence over the collective one, and in the end determine its character.
Only an ethical movement can rescue us from barbarism, and the ethical comes into existence only in individuals."
-Albert Schweitzer
"
Patterning your life around other's opinions is nothing more than slavery."
-Lawana Blackwell
