Quote:
Originally posted by Mad_Gecko
smooth As I was taught they were man's inalienable (sp?) rights. Not governed by any body or person. I could be wrong, anyone disagree?
EDIT:
I'd go so far as to say "A man's home is his Castle"
And UK citizens at this moment have NO "Bill of Rights ' 'xcept the Magna Carta, my argument rests solely on the basis of fact.
- Two lads broke into his home for the second time and he had the means to protect it. He used it, no bad IMHO, and the yanks should have nothin' to say about it, cause these rights are fundemental to your law. I want my law to change. I want the right to bear arms, and I want the right to defend my home!
|
As a US citizen you've got me on the point that we _claim_ to hold certain rights to be universally applicable. Some people, like me, actually attempt to uphold that claim. That particular reference, however, only applies to the relationship between people and their government--not between citizens.
Common law determines and is the foundation for civil and criminal regulations between citizens.
You might find it interesting that our Bill of Rights actually stemmed from England's Bill of Rights.
(here's a copy)
While there isn't a mention of unlawful searches and seizures (that came later to protect government officials and not, as popularly assumed, to protect the citizens) there
is a mention of the right to bear arms for self defense. Looks like you've got a bone to pick with the crown
as to where the hell that right went!
edit: oops--that "right" is only for Protestants! Isn't Martin a Catholic?
Quote:
|
That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;
|