Browsing the archives for the rights category.


gun rights, rights
golden gun

The best gun is the one you have with you.

I saw that the ACLU is suing South Dakota to allow an immigrant to have a concealed carry permit.  Even more strange was that GOA was opposing the suit.  So I asked GOA about it:

Me: “What’s the deal with Wayne Smith?  More private gun owners is good thing, right?”

Some GOA grunt:

“Constitutional rights belong only to citizens.  The ACLU’s logic can lead to tearing down our border – that there are no rights unique to American citizenship, so, hey, let everyone come in.  That same logic allows the state to take away the right to keep and bear arms of a citizen.  We have argued in court that only a citizen can lose his right to keep and bear arms by renouncing his citizenship.  The current view that citizenship is no big deal has led to a progressive encirclement of the exercise of our rights. We gave gone from denying the right to keep and bear arms to felons, then to those with misdemeanors, now to those with certain medical diagnoses (and that without any due process).

“We must make the distinction between citizens and others.

“The American constitutional order is one of rights for citizens.    Any enjoyment of those rights by non-citizens is a privilege in constitutional terms.  The ACLU, as usual, is wrong in this case.  It is for the state of South Dakota to determine whether legal non-citizens have the right to keep and bear arms.  I don’t agree with their new policy, but constitutionally, they are within their power to so act.

“I have forwarded your comments to my supervisor.”

Me: …

Continue Reading »

No Comments

Jefferson vs Lincoln: A False Choice


Josh Eboch at the Tenth Amendment Center writes that Americans must choose between Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln.  Yet that choice has already been made.  The American Experiment has given us the greater of the two evils presented for selection.

However, this was and still is a false choice.  America has gone down the path of violence because with the very first step they compromised the principle of individual sovereignty and self ownership.

It is too narrow to view American history as a conflict between the idea of federalism advocated by Jefferson and Lincoln’s nationalism.   This is merely one aspect of a greater conflict described by Murray Rothbard as the struggle between liberty and power.

Continue Reading »

No Comments




An individual can choose with whom they interact.  This freedom of association is a natural right and the essence of liberty.  Individuals exercise this right by cooperating for mutual benefit.  The resulting division of labor leads to modern societies, in which people work together and live affluently.  Societies in this sense are merely a way of describing the voluntary interactions of certain sets of individuals.  A hermit withdraws from society, not by physically removing himself from a location, but by refraining from all human interaction.

Individuals can interact, and hence form groups, however they agree to.  An individual may not be free to join a particular organization if the necessary actions would violate the rights of others.  However, an individual has the right to leave any organization, since this harms no one.  To withdraw does not require any interaction.  All that is required is to refrain from interacting.

When many individuals do this in concert with respect to a government, it is called secession.

Continue Reading »

No Comments