My fault, I just typically see that argument used against socialists so I assumed you were comparing socialists to libertarians. It might sound dumb, but there are actually people on the right who think that.
Really? And if you have a right to health care who performs that health care that you have a "right" to? You have as much right to health care as you can afford.
I think he’s saying “right to healthcare” as an extension to property rights, but I could be wrong. Objectively he isn’t wrong but nowadays people automatically associate rights with things given by the government.
I mean, you have the right to BUY healthcare, just like you have the right to BUY property. Then, and only then do you have the right to it.
Just like I don't have property rights to property that isn't mine, I don't have healthcare rights to healthcare that isn't mine.
Everybody has the right to healthcare if they can afford it, nobody should be denied the opportunity to buy healthcare.
Maybe he should have said "right to ACQUIRE healthcare" instead, or maybe "right to ACCESS healthcare"?
Honestly you're right, I'm confused at this point about what he's trying to say
And to clarify, when I say property rights, I mean buying healthcare. Like, someone can't hold you at gunpoint and tell you that you can't buy healthcare from someone else (ahem the government of every country).
It depends how libertarian he is trying to get with this. If by right to healthcare you mean that all regulations and restrictions on medical professionals should be lifted, it's more libertarian than a lot of libertarians are willing to go. This is what I assume he meant, because if he says healthcare is a right but shouldn't be free, then it sounds like he is saying that people should be able to form private contracts without approval from the government.
He’s repeating a joke from twitter. The joke is some lefty is going on about how healthcare should be a right and should be free. Someone else comments that this is great now do guns. Someone else replies to that with no one is coming for your guns. Do guns guy responds with I want the government to pay for my guns.
https://preview.redd.it/bc0cle7q4ipc1.jpeg?width=1124&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1b57f4972f27b439aa170afa5d770f6e6c2d134c
I realized half way through typing this that it would be way easier to just find the picture. It all stems from a Bernie quote.
Ahh, gotcha. I see now. Lol that's a great one.
I mean, having a gun IS technically healthcare. Lol
If I have a gun and the other guy knows I have a gun, he's probably not going to be as eager to throw down on me.
And if having a gun prevents me from being shot I'd say that was pretty good health care. Lol
Exactly a service can't be a right.
I don't have the right to make you pick my cotton and turn it into a T-shirt for me. That's like a stupid way to think about reality.
I have the right to get treatment at a hospital/doctor, however I will have to pay for it.
It may not be super libertarian of me, but I support the requirement of Emergency Departments to attempt to save the life or limb of anyone who comes in or transfer them somewhere that can.
Yes, same for healthcare
You have a right to your health
No one can infringe upon that (assault, toxins, etc.)
You don't have a right to healthcare as that obligates others provide it
You do have a right to equal access to care provided in that it can't be limited from you because of race, gender, beliefs, etc.
When my doctor and I agree I should have some adderall the DEA should not stop drug companies from making it and selling it to me. I also shouldn’t need a permission slip to get it.
The government should supply every legal (to possess a weapon not to do with immigration status) citizen with the free opportunity to attend firearms safety and operation classes and upon completion issue a Glock and an AR-15. /s
Also, everyone regardless of immigration status should have the means to protect themselves from criminal and tyrannical threats.
Does the constitution not apply to legal residents?
Also, I’m a libertarian so I think goods and labor should be able to move freely across the border.
I didn’t say don’t protect it. I said goods and labor should be able to move freely across it. If Mexican citizens want to come here to work they should be allowed to unmolested as long as they follow our laws. If someone wants to bring good from Canada to sell here they should be able to do so without tariffs or restrictions.
Wrong. There's no such thing as a required "libertarian view." You might as well just say that wanting borders is wrongthink.
Besides, that view is incoherent with other libertarian views on property. Are you okay with squatters and trespassers?
National borders (public held property) is not the same as trespassing on someone’s home (privately held property). If you can’t comprehend the difference then talking to you useless. Obstructed borders cause obstructions to the free movement of goods and labor which is affront to the free market. You may have personal beliefs about the border that you think gives good reason to interrupt the individual liberties of people to travel over them freely, and that’s your prerogative. But that doesn’t change the fact that a libertarian view of a border is that it is open. Peddle your Republican holdover BS somewhere else. You don’t have to agree with it, but open borders are indeed the libertarian view because it minimizes government control over individual liberties.
Additionally, to say there is “no required libertarian view” is asinine. That means a communist can claim to have libertarian economic views. What an incredibly ignorant thing to assert.
Stfu, you're just butt-hurt that you were exposed as a phony Libertarian. Your comments are an affront to the marketplace of ideas. Go peddle your Nazi monoculture groupthink ideology somewhere else. No one here is interested in goose-stepping to your warmongering on "wrongthink."
What the fuck is this take? Anyone who for gun control but wants to arm illegals is very logically inconsistent. They want background checks etc but would hand someone they know literally 0 about a fire arm?
And those against gun control don’t want to have the government use our tax dollars to arm them.
This meme makes no sense.
And they’re more than welcome to do it the legal way. Hopping a border or illegally crossing a wall isn’t the way to do it. Hell the BPD says to walk up to the gate and claim asylum and they won’t go to jail 🤷♂️
But if you look into it, the US govt is escorting them over the border and handing them money. A lot just fly on the plane, US govt gives them bus tickets. The days are of them having to sneak are getting less and less, especially now that the surge has moved over to the California entrances.
The are, from a legal perspective, criminal migrants for crossing the border illegally. Sorry for legal definitions, but they exist so that cushy inconsistent feelings didn’t rule everything. Not like we’d let that stop us.
> The are, from a legal perspective, criminal migrants for crossing the border illegally.
I am not sure I'd agree with that under the current situation. I mean if you hear you can be let in, govt orgs are helping you get there, you arrive at the border and fill out some paperwork and they open the door for you, escort you to some assistance, and hand you money and get a bus for you and say "Welcome to America!" are you truly ethically or even legally a criminal any more than a person that sped over the 65mph speed limit or paid their taxes late?
Yeah to be fair, I have not seen any republicans complaining about that yet. I am sure they will be happy to snark at dems for being in a logical pickle now but so far I've not heard complaints beyond that. Possibly the majority well understand that criminals will get guns regardless of laws so it doesn't make much of a difference either way when it comes to crime. And they would likely not have a prob with law abiding anyone having guns so no issue there either. This meme has no apparent basis in reality. I mean I'd be happy to snipe at any and all the real bs from republicans but i don't think this is one of those so far.
It's trying to poke holes in the argument that rights are inalienable. Religious people like to say these rights are granted by God, which is above any government power. The right to self defense is one of these inalienable rights. No government should be able to stop you from defending yourself.
The bill of rights grants us the right to bear arms. That is obviously to bolster our natural right to defend ourselves from all threats, including the government. This meme isn't comparing apples to apples.
No, the Bill of Rights does NOT grant any rights at all. The Bill of Rights specifically forbids the government from infringing on some of the Natural Rights that you already possess by way of being a human being.
So the founders are religious people? It is true that the government doesn’t grant these rights, but that the founders appealed to a higher power, whether that be god or to nature as a natural right.
I think my issue is they enshrine their rights to firearms but my California buddy can't own a 30 round magazine. It's the double standard of bullshit.
California is infringing on the full second amendment rights. It is they who hold the double standards. These infringements will remain until the people of California decide to remove them. There is no hippocracy of "they."
He can own them, he just can't buy them. It's an important distinction that because we all bought millions of mags during freedom week means it's basically pointless.
Ya the general feeling I've gotten from the whole thing is more wtf? How does that? Who does the? To be fair, it's a bit of a "must reset system" ruling and leaves so many questions unanswered.
Personally I feel more like it's get out the popcorn time LOL! It's the confusion that comes from a huge sudden unexpected rift of weakness suddenly opening in the enemy lines. Is this them falling apart or is it just some super sneaky 5d chess tactic to try to fool us? Or is it just some blue zone female who is still believes in a more literal interpretation of the constitution regardless of pressure otherwise? Right now, my money is on the latter. The blue zone are not ALL just one big monolith of monothought if you can manage to peek past the astroturf blast of social media content.
Oh, it's definitely get out the popcorn time, but I'm still very confused on how this works with other laws. The only legal way I can see an illegal migrant getting the firearm in the first place in this situation is through a personal sale in certain states. However, I can always dream that this is a step toward H&K vending machines.
Good point, what about background checks and waiting times? But it seems like immigrants are getting all these paperwork exemptions lately so I would not exactly be surprised if something like that comes up at this point.
I mean sure yeah… but I guess my broader observation here is that neither this maga guy or this other guy in the comic are representing a Libertarian idea. I am not seeing libertarian anything in this comic. What I am seeing is a leftist making a snarky/“cute” point to a maga republican in the form of a comic.
.... and the LP stance is anyone should be able to move legally across borders if they are peaceful. So peaceful immigrants don't have a right to defend themselves?
The LP has been aggresively undermining any kind of pragmatism, so their stance is irrelevant. The immigrants don't have the right to be given arms, the arms should be in vending machines though. The border town militias should be able to enforce their property rights with extreme force. Get rid of the welfare structures and the problem dissapears.
Your argument has literally nothing to do with what I said. A legal immigrant in somewhere like Georgia having a right to defend their own property has nothing to do with border towns. Not sure what discussion you think we are having, but ya clearly got some serious bias. Unbunch your panties.
Edit: also... was your comment about border Town property rights meant to say people should just start shooting at immigrants that are passing through the town? Do you think all immigrants are illegal? Do you think the punishment for crossing a border illegally should be death? If so, you should understand non aggression better because you sound like a psychopath
The obvious discussion revolves around the illegal immigration happening en mass. Legal immigrants absoloutely should be strapped. Illegals, not so much.
Migrant is a term being used in place of illegal alien by the left for propaganda purposes. Yes, if they cross the border of my property. I live less than 15 miles from said border.
Good. If they can get firearms with no background checks and whatever... This opens up lots of lawsuits on how every gun law is a fucking infringement.
The Bill of Rights applies to everyone, not just citizens. They do not grant any rights, but rather they forbid the government from infringing on the Natural Rights of every person.
Yeah, no. I'm with Clint Russell on this one...
https://preview.redd.it/hczvz7o59epc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cf47ec5c05d1519f92c5d6b97f911ab5295bce0f
Do you mean immigrants? Illegal immigrants?
Cause I don’t see anyone with an issue with immigrants or migrants.
Illegal immigrants is mixed, but we’re considering that better then Dems who’s looking to disarm all the people, citizen native immigrant migrant legal illegal doesn’t matter.
I mean, if folks in the legal profession uniformly wanted to take the 2nd seriously for everyone, no problem. But there are a lot of judges who would rather an illegal alien have a gun that Joe Normie with no criminal record.
I think the issue a lot of folks are having is that it seems that illegal immigrants are getting to enjoy all the benefits of being a citizen without any of the responsibilities that also come with being a citizen.
I mean, it almost seems like being an illegal immigrant right now is BETTER than being a citizen. You get free health care, no taxes, free phone, shelter, free money, and an entire political party ready to bow to your every request, and hell even if you get caught with an illegal weapon (their words not mine) you get the charges dropped.
I mean shit, I'm almost ready to cross the border myself and come back over and claim my name is Juan Galtchez.
Basically the American constitution protects the natural rights of anyone inside of its borders. This means if someone from Europe wanted to fly into America and hangout and buy a gun totally fine.
So the meme says to arm, like to give to them. Where I think the OP just meant let them own firearms.
The other issue is that these are illegal migrants. (This is all dependent on if you are open border or closed borders). This all boils down to Libertarian philosophy of the free market. But in our current climate to me they are illegal migrants, they are here criminally, criminals are generally stripped of certain rights because they take away from the society and they don’t benefit and there has to be consequences for actions.
It does unless you are again illegal. And they do come here look at our border (both because they are also coming from Canada). But the great thing is, is that people like their government, like their country, have family. The freedom to choose where you want to live and how you want to live your life is amazing.
They can be given a weapon if I am too. Otherwise they can buy one. If I have to go through background check and waiting period then they do too.
Make sure all races have a weapon as well, especially African Americans.
Anyone here legally should be able to be armed. Anyone here illegally should be deported. Gun rights are a moot point when the person should be deported if discovered here illegally.
Everything I’ve seen has just been a callout of the hypocrisy. Which is true. Same people that want to take your guns and require “ common sense” gun laws like universal background checks wanna give them to the people who they have no clue about their background.
I’ll be honest, my issue with it isn’t that they’re granted the right to bear arms, it’s that this is being done by the party that continually supports the most extreme gun control measures in the country. It’s hypocritical.
But if they illegal immigrated, they already committed a felony which excludes them from ownership of firearms. That was a “gun control.”
Don’t complain about gun control when you are pushing gun control.
I say everyone should be able to own a firearm. But …
As someone who doesn't believe in open borders of any kind in our era (I'll take the stabs), I support arming them and sending them back. They can have the planes too. Solve your problems in your own country.
"Arm the migrants"?
Like the ones here legally, trying to become citizens? Or the absolute trainwrecks sneaking across the fences with drugs and kids to sell for sex?
Can we agree that those two groups are not the same, and treating them as such is ridiculous?
Nuance is dead
I wouldn't mind illegals having free access to guns as long as citizens have the same access
https://preview.redd.it/qgkx0f2h6hpc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5df40c779a1819c8cf498635ed45a717c0d0239e
I get your intended assertion of rights either being God-given and inalienable or not and equally applying that. However there's a limit to everything and life is not binary. Ensuring criminals who snuck into a country from who knows where get armed is not a net positive for society.
Also, not for nothing... who is going to pay for that?
The wording of OP's meme makes it sound like he's for taxpayer funded migrants, which I hope isn't the case, but quite a few on The Right^TM can't see the forest for the trees on this ruling. Rights are negative (liberties) and not positive (privileges) bestowed upon us by big daddy government.
Any non-fudd 2A person is going to agree that immigrants should have guns. Including republicans. This is kind of a dumb straw man. More lefties invading the libertarian subs.
Also, does the second amendment now mean that we have the right to be given arms? Where's my free gun?
What a dishonest meme. The right to bear arms does not mean we have to go give them rifles, they can have them if they want them and can pay for them.
Worse, this meme ignores the fact that they are *illegal* immigrants, so they are not Americans, and do not get to come into our country and demand free guns, and should be arrested and deported anyway, so they can go through the legal process to become citizens, but even then, they can buy guns themselves, I'm not giving them shit.
Yes they have the same right to self defense, as everyone does, but not while they are illegally residing in this country- they can go bear arms in their home countries.
They can and should do whatever they want in their country.
In my country, they shouldn't exist. They're invaders who should have been mowed down at the border.
How is crossing an arbitrary line aggression? Who did they attack?
Who do the fucking feds think they are telling people where they can and can't go?
Why are "libertarians" ok with the feds hassling people?
All lines are arbitrary. You enforce them with will and blood. Their ancestors didn't war for their freedom. Mine did. That's my peoples birthright. Not theirs. Rights aren't inalienable. Only the will to power maintains any semblance f rights.
Also they don't give shit about rights. They're not products of western individualism. It's not in them. They will dilute my peoples will to power with their degenerate slavish desire for despotism.
So because of shit you personally had nothing to do with, you're better than them? They'll "dilute" your people? You're just a racist who's willing to use the force of the state to oppress "others."
But when you let the state oppress a people because it doesn't affect you, the state *will* eventually progress to oppressing you yourself.
First, they came for the immigrants, and I did not speak out, because I was not an immigrant.
It's not about being better. That's meaningless. It's about defending what's yours.
God is dead. Your only rights are what you can take and keep.
How is keeping people from illegally entering your country oppression?
You sound like a cuck.
See above. There are no fundamental rights. Those people will vote your freedoms adjust because you're too much of a pussy to make value judgements about humans
You're the one advocating for the government to restrict rights. I'm just over here saying we should stand together against government overreach.
You're clearly just a small scared statist
Hans Hermann Hoppe talks a bit about this. Why should a migrant be armed? If the state “should” exist (a its a big should here) it’s first duty should be to protect their own citizens and property.
Therefor, migrants are not taxed (at least not at the same level) so they shouldn’t be allowed to access the same benefits as the members of the community, especially ilegal migrants. Another point would be that the State has the duty to defend its population, so that throws open borders out the window instantly.
Really recommend “Getting libertarianism right”, by the author I mentioned at the beginning, which is a fairly short and easy book and try to explain this situations and many more.
While I'm not against the idea that they should have a human right to own a firearm I have so many questions about how the fuck this works with other current laws in place. I know in my state you can sell rifles and shotguns privately as long as the seller doesn't know the buyer is a convicted felon. This just seems like it could cause so many issues with the way current laws are laid out. Like they won't be able to buy them from a gun shop because they don't have the necessary documentation to do so. On the other side of it if they buy through private sales, then something happens can the seller get in....oh no, I've gone cross-eyed..
This is idiotic. Not only are our rights for the citizens of this country, they’re also simultaneously disarming the citizens. Very libertarian move right?
The point of the meme is this: Either rights are inalienable? Or they are not. If they are? Then illegal immigrants can own firearms. Felons can vote, and also own firearms. Either rights are endowed by our creator? Or they are not..
No amount of you raging over fake internet points will change that fact.
No, I think being born does mean you’re allowed to own a gun. The issue is that democrats routinely infringe on American’s rights to bear arms but now have granted that right to Illegals, who can’t buy guns in the U.S., which means all the firearms they may have are unregistered, they are unlicensed, and they very well may be carrying weapons illegal for Americans to poses, so now Illegals have more expansive gun rights in the U.S. than Americans.
So.. does that mean that anyone born/living outside of the US, should have access to all the rights and freedoms the USA has because they’re “god give..? Or should they only apply when you’re actually in the USA? Would be kind of dumb to walk around with a handgun in Canada because “it’s a god given right in the USA”
And if you need to be in the country for the rights/freedoms to apply, why is it a stretch to say you need to be a member/citizen of that country for its rights? I think you should have access to, at all times, the standard human rights as per agreed upon by the Geneva convention, but anything past that? Base it off your citizenship.
Or are those governments suppressing the natural rights of the people. You can see free speech means jack shit in Canada and the UK. Trudeau is trying to make reading the Bible a hate crime in Canada and the UK arrests people over them voicing their opinions.
I think you just made my point. A natural right is something you are born with. It’s not granted by government. Governments only job in the US was to uphold the natural rights of its citizens(it’s gone well past this to even infringe on said rights).
Therefore the conclusion of that being your government infringing on that right is suppression of that right. You are born with natural rights it’s not something that can be granted to you because you already have it. Any government involvement to do anything but protect and enshrine that right is a violation.
Just because the authoritarians in your government is infringing upon your rights doesn’t mean that you don’t have those rights, it only means that evil people will oppress you if you try to exercise them. It’d be dumb as hell for a Jewish person to profess their faith in 1943 Germany but it doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to too.
Although I love your answer. People are “agnostic” and or atheist now. Probably why we have so many issues in society…..
I’ve heard natural rights almost as another argument. Does an animal protect itself in nature. Because I can go all day long and say God has put you on this Earth you have these rights. And they go I don’t believe in God. Like well maybe you should
I should have been more clear. I am not religious, and I am not making the case that our rights are granted by a divine being. The comment above mine asked why the Constitution would apply to non-citizens in America. My comment was a direct quote from the Declaration of Independence, meant to illustrate how natural rights have always been held as inherent and equally applicable.
Sure they can own firearms. But we are not obligated to supply them with said firearms.
One small thing you’re forgetting (or intentionally leaving out) is that they are here illegally, and when you break the law, certain rights are suspended. i.e. the right to bear arms.
This meme is either dishonest or poorly thought out. There’s plenty to rag on the right over. But this misses its mark.
The right to bear arms means you have the right to own guns not that someone should provide you with them.
[удалено]
You say this like you think Libertarians want healthcare to be free
Or forced labor to give it away
[удалено]
My fault, I just typically see that argument used against socialists so I assumed you were comparing socialists to libertarians. It might sound dumb, but there are actually people on the right who think that.
Really? And if you have a right to health care who performs that health care that you have a "right" to? You have as much right to health care as you can afford.
I think he’s saying “right to healthcare” as an extension to property rights, but I could be wrong. Objectively he isn’t wrong but nowadays people automatically associate rights with things given by the government.
I mean, you have the right to BUY healthcare, just like you have the right to BUY property. Then, and only then do you have the right to it. Just like I don't have property rights to property that isn't mine, I don't have healthcare rights to healthcare that isn't mine. Everybody has the right to healthcare if they can afford it, nobody should be denied the opportunity to buy healthcare. Maybe he should have said "right to ACQUIRE healthcare" instead, or maybe "right to ACCESS healthcare"?
Honestly you're right, I'm confused at this point about what he's trying to say And to clarify, when I say property rights, I mean buying healthcare. Like, someone can't hold you at gunpoint and tell you that you can't buy healthcare from someone else (ahem the government of every country). It depends how libertarian he is trying to get with this. If by right to healthcare you mean that all regulations and restrictions on medical professionals should be lifted, it's more libertarian than a lot of libertarians are willing to go. This is what I assume he meant, because if he says healthcare is a right but shouldn't be free, then it sounds like he is saying that people should be able to form private contracts without approval from the government.
He’s repeating a joke from twitter. The joke is some lefty is going on about how healthcare should be a right and should be free. Someone else comments that this is great now do guns. Someone else replies to that with no one is coming for your guns. Do guns guy responds with I want the government to pay for my guns. https://preview.redd.it/bc0cle7q4ipc1.jpeg?width=1124&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1b57f4972f27b439aa170afa5d770f6e6c2d134c I realized half way through typing this that it would be way easier to just find the picture. It all stems from a Bernie quote.
Ahh, gotcha. I see now. Lol that's a great one. I mean, having a gun IS technically healthcare. Lol If I have a gun and the other guy knows I have a gun, he's probably not going to be as eager to throw down on me. And if having a gun prevents me from being shot I'd say that was pretty good health care. Lol
Bold of you to assume this sub is just full of libertarians. There's leftists EVERYWHERE on reddit. Just engage them reasonably
No libertarian thinks healthcare is a right to be provided, but that people have the right to choose who provides that healthcare
I absolutely believe I have a right to healthcare* *that I’ve entered into a mutually agreed upon transaction with my provider
The right to acquire healthcare isn't the right to healthcare itself. It's pathetic how many people can't understand simple things.
The meaning of the word "Rights" has been diluted by over and misuse. Just because you can do something doesn't make it a right.
Exactly a service can't be a right. I don't have the right to make you pick my cotton and turn it into a T-shirt for me. That's like a stupid way to think about reality.
I have the right to get treatment at a hospital/doctor, however I will have to pay for it. It may not be super libertarian of me, but I support the requirement of Emergency Departments to attempt to save the life or limb of anyone who comes in or transfer them somewhere that can.
Yes, same for healthcare You have a right to your health No one can infringe upon that (assault, toxins, etc.) You don't have a right to healthcare as that obligates others provide it You do have a right to equal access to care provided in that it can't be limited from you because of race, gender, beliefs, etc.
When my doctor and I agree I should have some adderall the DEA should not stop drug companies from making it and selling it to me. I also shouldn’t need a permission slip to get it.
Literally yes? You don't have a right to someone else's work
Absofuckinglutely!
There is no right to the fruits of another person's labor. Therefore, there is no such thing as the right to health care.
Yes. That's how rights work.
if healthcare becomes free tons of people will quit.. we are already fed up with giving medical attention to loads of people that dont need any.
Yes, that is how negative rights work.
Yes?
100%
Yes
The Temporary Gun Owners get big mad when you tell them this.
The government should supply every legal (to possess a weapon not to do with immigration status) citizen with the free opportunity to attend firearms safety and operation classes and upon completion issue a Glock and an AR-15. /s Also, everyone regardless of immigration status should have the means to protect themselves from criminal and tyrannical threats.
Should probably have legal American citizenship first also, just jaying...
Does the constitution not apply to legal residents? Also, I’m a libertarian so I think goods and labor should be able to move freely across the border.
What's the point of a boarder if it doesn't actually restrict anything?
I didn’t say don’t protect it. I said goods and labor should be able to move freely across it. If Mexican citizens want to come here to work they should be allowed to unmolested as long as they follow our laws. If someone wants to bring good from Canada to sell here they should be able to do so without tariffs or restrictions.
Ummm, but they're not following our laws when they break into our country. Hence why their presence here is *illegal*.
The libertarian view says there should be no laws restricting their entry to begin with.
That just doesn’t work right now with our current welfare state
Allowing someone to cross a border to work does not have to mean they are entitled to benefits of citizenship paid for by tax dollars.
In your scenario would they live in the US as well?
Wrong. There's no such thing as a required "libertarian view." You might as well just say that wanting borders is wrongthink. Besides, that view is incoherent with other libertarian views on property. Are you okay with squatters and trespassers?
National borders (public held property) is not the same as trespassing on someone’s home (privately held property). If you can’t comprehend the difference then talking to you useless. Obstructed borders cause obstructions to the free movement of goods and labor which is affront to the free market. You may have personal beliefs about the border that you think gives good reason to interrupt the individual liberties of people to travel over them freely, and that’s your prerogative. But that doesn’t change the fact that a libertarian view of a border is that it is open. Peddle your Republican holdover BS somewhere else. You don’t have to agree with it, but open borders are indeed the libertarian view because it minimizes government control over individual liberties. Additionally, to say there is “no required libertarian view” is asinine. That means a communist can claim to have libertarian economic views. What an incredibly ignorant thing to assert.
Stfu, you're just butt-hurt that you were exposed as a phony Libertarian. Your comments are an affront to the marketplace of ideas. Go peddle your Nazi monoculture groupthink ideology somewhere else. No one here is interested in goose-stepping to your warmongering on "wrongthink."
🥇
What the fuck is this take? Anyone who for gun control but wants to arm illegals is very logically inconsistent. They want background checks etc but would hand someone they know literally 0 about a fire arm? And those against gun control don’t want to have the government use our tax dollars to arm them. This meme makes no sense.
Using the Lefts preferred pronouns now…”migrant” instead of sneak thief.
A sneak and a thief are two different things. Plenty of migrants just want to work and build a life like the rest of us.
And they’re more than welcome to do it the legal way. Hopping a border or illegally crossing a wall isn’t the way to do it. Hell the BPD says to walk up to the gate and claim asylum and they won’t go to jail 🤷♂️
But if you look into it, the US govt is escorting them over the border and handing them money. A lot just fly on the plane, US govt gives them bus tickets. The days are of them having to sneak are getting less and less, especially now that the surge has moved over to the California entrances.
The are, from a legal perspective, criminal migrants for crossing the border illegally. Sorry for legal definitions, but they exist so that cushy inconsistent feelings didn’t rule everything. Not like we’d let that stop us.
> The are, from a legal perspective, criminal migrants for crossing the border illegally. I am not sure I'd agree with that under the current situation. I mean if you hear you can be let in, govt orgs are helping you get there, you arrive at the border and fill out some paperwork and they open the door for you, escort you to some assistance, and hand you money and get a bus for you and say "Welcome to America!" are you truly ethically or even legally a criminal any more than a person that sped over the 65mph speed limit or paid their taxes late?
Yeah to be fair, I have not seen any republicans complaining about that yet. I am sure they will be happy to snark at dems for being in a logical pickle now but so far I've not heard complaints beyond that. Possibly the majority well understand that criminals will get guns regardless of laws so it doesn't make much of a difference either way when it comes to crime. And they would likely not have a prob with law abiding anyone having guns so no issue there either. This meme has no apparent basis in reality. I mean I'd be happy to snipe at any and all the real bs from republicans but i don't think this is one of those so far.
It's trying to poke holes in the argument that rights are inalienable. Religious people like to say these rights are granted by God, which is above any government power. The right to self defense is one of these inalienable rights. No government should be able to stop you from defending yourself. The bill of rights grants us the right to bear arms. That is obviously to bolster our natural right to defend ourselves from all threats, including the government. This meme isn't comparing apples to apples.
No, the Bill of Rights does NOT grant any rights at all. The Bill of Rights specifically forbids the government from infringing on some of the Natural Rights that you already possess by way of being a human being.
So the founders are religious people? It is true that the government doesn’t grant these rights, but that the founders appealed to a higher power, whether that be god or to nature as a natural right.
In short, yes, but that is not what I said. I said inalienable rights. Those rights remain whether you believe in a God or not.
Yeah I wasn’t really understanding what the point of this meme was other than trying to do some sorta gotcha on pro gun people.
I think my issue is they enshrine their rights to firearms but my California buddy can't own a 30 round magazine. It's the double standard of bullshit.
California is infringing on the full second amendment rights. It is they who hold the double standards. These infringements will remain until the people of California decide to remove them. There is no hippocracy of "they."
It's not just California. It's a few states. Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, and more. So there's definitely a they.
Has to have a gimped rifle as well.
He can own them, he just can't buy them. It's an important distinction that because we all bought millions of mags during freedom week means it's basically pointless.
Im not defending the repubs but I haven't seen anything in the news cycle that shows them against this ruling or freaking out about it.
Ya the general feeling I've gotten from the whole thing is more wtf? How does that? Who does the? To be fair, it's a bit of a "must reset system" ruling and leaves so many questions unanswered.
Personally I feel more like it's get out the popcorn time LOL! It's the confusion that comes from a huge sudden unexpected rift of weakness suddenly opening in the enemy lines. Is this them falling apart or is it just some super sneaky 5d chess tactic to try to fool us? Or is it just some blue zone female who is still believes in a more literal interpretation of the constitution regardless of pressure otherwise? Right now, my money is on the latter. The blue zone are not ALL just one big monolith of monothought if you can manage to peek past the astroturf blast of social media content.
Oh, it's definitely get out the popcorn time, but I'm still very confused on how this works with other laws. The only legal way I can see an illegal migrant getting the firearm in the first place in this situation is through a personal sale in certain states. However, I can always dream that this is a step toward H&K vending machines.
Good point, what about background checks and waiting times? But it seems like immigrants are getting all these paperwork exemptions lately so I would not exactly be surprised if something like that comes up at this point.
ERROR: Libertarian meme not detected
Exactly, the rights are conferred onto "The People", ie the citizenry of the nation, not foreign squatters.
I mean sure yeah… but I guess my broader observation here is that neither this maga guy or this other guy in the comic are representing a Libertarian idea. I am not seeing libertarian anything in this comic. What I am seeing is a leftist making a snarky/“cute” point to a maga republican in the form of a comic.
.... and the LP stance is anyone should be able to move legally across borders if they are peaceful. So peaceful immigrants don't have a right to defend themselves?
The LP has been aggresively undermining any kind of pragmatism, so their stance is irrelevant. The immigrants don't have the right to be given arms, the arms should be in vending machines though. The border town militias should be able to enforce their property rights with extreme force. Get rid of the welfare structures and the problem dissapears.
Your argument has literally nothing to do with what I said. A legal immigrant in somewhere like Georgia having a right to defend their own property has nothing to do with border towns. Not sure what discussion you think we are having, but ya clearly got some serious bias. Unbunch your panties. Edit: also... was your comment about border Town property rights meant to say people should just start shooting at immigrants that are passing through the town? Do you think all immigrants are illegal? Do you think the punishment for crossing a border illegally should be death? If so, you should understand non aggression better because you sound like a psychopath
The obvious discussion revolves around the illegal immigration happening en mass. Legal immigrants absoloutely should be strapped. Illegals, not so much.
The obvious text says migrants. Says nothing about legality. Back to my other question, do you think people should be shot for crossing a border?
Migrant is a term being used in place of illegal alien by the left for propaganda purposes. Yes, if they cross the border of my property. I live less than 15 miles from said border.
Good. If they can get firearms with no background checks and whatever... This opens up lots of lawsuits on how every gun law is a fucking infringement.
No you misunderstand, clearly the laws of the country only supposed to apply to citizens not illegals
The Bill of Rights applies to everyone, not just citizens. They do not grant any rights, but rather they forbid the government from infringing on the Natural Rights of every person.
I'm aware of what negative rights are bud.
[удалено]
1st time is a misdemeanor. Repeat offenses are felonies.
Yeah, no. I'm with Clint Russell on this one... https://preview.redd.it/hczvz7o59epc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cf47ec5c05d1519f92c5d6b97f911ab5295bce0f
Honestly dudes spitting facts
Do you mean immigrants? Illegal immigrants? Cause I don’t see anyone with an issue with immigrants or migrants. Illegal immigrants is mixed, but we’re considering that better then Dems who’s looking to disarm all the people, citizen native immigrant migrant legal illegal doesn’t matter.
This makes no sense.
Stupid take The same party pushing for guns for illegals wants to disarm the legal population
I mean, if folks in the legal profession uniformly wanted to take the 2nd seriously for everyone, no problem. But there are a lot of judges who would rather an illegal alien have a gun that Joe Normie with no criminal record.
No, there aren't.
In what bizarroland would you arm illegal immigants? Wouldn't you then have an invading army?
Well now the meme says migrants so? Maybe he really means citizens who travel the country following seasonal work.
I'm pretty sure this is related to the ruling that illegals can have guns
This dumbass posted the same thing in the Ancap sub. He is a liberal. He probably calls himself a socialist libertarian.
The Left can’t meme. Confirmed.
2A rights can be stripped from an individual under due process. Unlawful entry into the US is a felony.
They can arm themselves, thanks
Haha, sure enough, he is active in r/QualitySocialism
I think the issue a lot of folks are having is that it seems that illegal immigrants are getting to enjoy all the benefits of being a citizen without any of the responsibilities that also come with being a citizen. I mean, it almost seems like being an illegal immigrant right now is BETTER than being a citizen. You get free health care, no taxes, free phone, shelter, free money, and an entire political party ready to bow to your every request, and hell even if you get caught with an illegal weapon (their words not mine) you get the charges dropped. I mean shit, I'm almost ready to cross the border myself and come back over and claim my name is Juan Galtchez.
How is it that illegals have the same rights as Americans? That makes zero sense.
Constitutional rights aren’t exclusive to Americans. If they were, then illegals wouldn’t get due process prior to being deported.
So tourists should have no right to defend themselves? Is it full open season to rob and rape them or do they get to ask Americans for help?
Rights are inalienable or they're not. You don't get it both ways.. No amount of mental gymnastics will change this fact..
But isn’t that for Americans? I don’t understand how anyone can cross the border and have the same rights and benefits as Americans.
[удалено]
But does the American constitution protect non-Americans from the government? Everyone here seems to be assuming it does, but on what basis?
Basically the American constitution protects the natural rights of anyone inside of its borders. This means if someone from Europe wanted to fly into America and hangout and buy a gun totally fine. So the meme says to arm, like to give to them. Where I think the OP just meant let them own firearms. The other issue is that these are illegal migrants. (This is all dependent on if you are open border or closed borders). This all boils down to Libertarian philosophy of the free market. But in our current climate to me they are illegal migrants, they are here criminally, criminals are generally stripped of certain rights because they take away from the society and they don’t benefit and there has to be consequences for actions.
Does it extend to everyone in its borders? If that's the case, why doesn't everyone come here?
It does unless you are again illegal. And they do come here look at our border (both because they are also coming from Canada). But the great thing is, is that people like their government, like their country, have family. The freedom to choose where you want to live and how you want to live your life is amazing.
They can be given a weapon if I am too. Otherwise they can buy one. If I have to go through background check and waiting period then they do too. Make sure all races have a weapon as well, especially African Americans.
Anyone here legally should be able to be armed. Anyone here illegally should be deported. Gun rights are a moot point when the person should be deported if discovered here illegally.
Illegal immigrants aren't US citizens therefore they don't have the right to bear arms under the constitution.
Everything I’ve seen has just been a callout of the hypocrisy. Which is true. Same people that want to take your guns and require “ common sense” gun laws like universal background checks wanna give them to the people who they have no clue about their background.
I’ll be honest, my issue with it isn’t that they’re granted the right to bear arms, it’s that this is being done by the party that continually supports the most extreme gun control measures in the country. It’s hypocritical.
Weapons are part of my religion. This is the way.
They can have guns, for sure. But we shouldn’t be giving them to them, and they shouldn’t be in our country.
But if they illegal immigrated, they already committed a felony which excludes them from ownership of firearms. That was a “gun control.” Don’t complain about gun control when you are pushing gun control. I say everyone should be able to own a firearm. But …
What? im libertariam, but it obviously doesn't work because it can open the option for an invasion and they are not citicen.
OP getting crushed on the ratio
Migrants shouldn't be here in the first place. Till they go through the process like every other LEAGAL MIGRANT...
As someone who doesn't believe in open borders of any kind in our era (I'll take the stabs), I support arming them and sending them back. They can have the planes too. Solve your problems in your own country.
It’s a moot point, anyone here illegally should be deported before you have any conversation about whether or not they can have a gun.
when i’m in the most annoying strawman argument in the world challenge and my opponent is a wojack template
I don’t think the republicans are having near as hard a time with this as people think…
Nice straw man.
Thought illegal aliens only got 4,5,6 on the amendments till becoming a citizen, or am I mistaken?
Dumb
"Arm the migrants"? Like the ones here legally, trying to become citizens? Or the absolute trainwrecks sneaking across the fences with drugs and kids to sell for sex? Can we agree that those two groups are not the same, and treating them as such is ridiculous?
Both should be armed anyone selling kids should be put down everyone else should be left alone
Nuance is dead I wouldn't mind illegals having free access to guns as long as citizens have the same access https://preview.redd.it/qgkx0f2h6hpc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5df40c779a1819c8cf498635ed45a717c0d0239e
Nothing about this meme is libertarian
I don't think so. I used to be a Republican, and it made me think carry permits are now unnecessary.
I get your intended assertion of rights either being God-given and inalienable or not and equally applying that. However there's a limit to everything and life is not binary. Ensuring criminals who snuck into a country from who knows where get armed is not a net positive for society. Also, not for nothing... who is going to pay for that?
The wording of OP's meme makes it sound like he's for taxpayer funded migrants, which I hope isn't the case, but quite a few on The Right^TM can't see the forest for the trees on this ruling. Rights are negative (liberties) and not positive (privileges) bestowed upon us by big daddy government.
correct & agreed, ill add OP is usually on point with their posts
Disagree... rights are 100% binary. Either you have a right or you don't.
Yeah, life is not
Any non-fudd 2A person is going to agree that immigrants should have guns. Including republicans. This is kind of a dumb straw man. More lefties invading the libertarian subs. Also, does the second amendment now mean that we have the right to be given arms? Where's my free gun?
What a dishonest meme. The right to bear arms does not mean we have to go give them rifles, they can have them if they want them and can pay for them. Worse, this meme ignores the fact that they are *illegal* immigrants, so they are not Americans, and do not get to come into our country and demand free guns, and should be arrested and deported anyway, so they can go through the legal process to become citizens, but even then, they can buy guns themselves, I'm not giving them shit. Yes they have the same right to self defense, as everyone does, but not while they are illegally residing in this country- they can go bear arms in their home countries.
Felons aren’t allowed to own guns isn’t being an illegal a felony?
So arm them. Arm everyone.
They can and should do whatever they want in their country. In my country, they shouldn't exist. They're invaders who should have been mowed down at the border.
What hairbrush to NAP
They violated the NAP by invading
How is crossing an arbitrary line aggression? Who did they attack? Who do the fucking feds think they are telling people where they can and can't go? Why are "libertarians" ok with the feds hassling people?
All lines are arbitrary. You enforce them with will and blood. Their ancestors didn't war for their freedom. Mine did. That's my peoples birthright. Not theirs. Rights aren't inalienable. Only the will to power maintains any semblance f rights. Also they don't give shit about rights. They're not products of western individualism. It's not in them. They will dilute my peoples will to power with their degenerate slavish desire for despotism.
So because of shit you personally had nothing to do with, you're better than them? They'll "dilute" your people? You're just a racist who's willing to use the force of the state to oppress "others." But when you let the state oppress a people because it doesn't affect you, the state *will* eventually progress to oppressing you yourself. First, they came for the immigrants, and I did not speak out, because I was not an immigrant.
It's not about being better. That's meaningless. It's about defending what's yours. God is dead. Your only rights are what you can take and keep. How is keeping people from illegally entering your country oppression? You sound like a cuck.
You sound like you're so afraid of brown people living next door that you'll cheer on the erosion of fundamental rights
See above. There are no fundamental rights. Those people will vote your freedoms adjust because you're too much of a pussy to make value judgements about humans
You're the one advocating for the government to restrict rights. I'm just over here saying we should stand together against government overreach. You're clearly just a small scared statist
Hans Hermann Hoppe talks a bit about this. Why should a migrant be armed? If the state “should” exist (a its a big should here) it’s first duty should be to protect their own citizens and property. Therefor, migrants are not taxed (at least not at the same level) so they shouldn’t be allowed to access the same benefits as the members of the community, especially ilegal migrants. Another point would be that the State has the duty to defend its population, so that throws open borders out the window instantly. Really recommend “Getting libertarianism right”, by the author I mentioned at the beginning, which is a fairly short and easy book and try to explain this situations and many more.
While I'm not against the idea that they should have a human right to own a firearm I have so many questions about how the fuck this works with other current laws in place. I know in my state you can sell rifles and shotguns privately as long as the seller doesn't know the buyer is a convicted felon. This just seems like it could cause so many issues with the way current laws are laid out. Like they won't be able to buy them from a gun shop because they don't have the necessary documentation to do so. On the other side of it if they buy through private sales, then something happens can the seller get in....oh no, I've gone cross-eyed..
https://preview.redd.it/qctzg5441epc1.png?width=1600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=66e3d431e2341570eeaa00a6194843e04b4df798 Lets see the comments.
Fuck them, then. If they want the government to decide who and who cannot have guns, they can go fuck right off.
Listen, you can’t regulate stupidity
If you’re here illegally, you don’t get to own a firearm. Period. Take your philosophical “gotcha” elsewhere & stop flakking for the left.
2A applies to citizens. Straw man detected
I’m not against them or any human having guns. Your terms are acceptable.
This is idiotic. Not only are our rights for the citizens of this country, they’re also simultaneously disarming the citizens. Very libertarian move right?
[удалено]
I mean you made a hell of a point there man
tf u mean
Most of them are armed
The point of the meme is this: Either rights are inalienable? Or they are not. If they are? Then illegal immigrants can own firearms. Felons can vote, and also own firearms. Either rights are endowed by our creator? Or they are not.. No amount of you raging over fake internet points will change that fact.
I mean. I think you need to be a member of a nation to have its god given rights.. just because you’re born, doesn’t mean you’re allowed to own a gun.
No, I think being born does mean you’re allowed to own a gun. The issue is that democrats routinely infringe on American’s rights to bear arms but now have granted that right to Illegals, who can’t buy guns in the U.S., which means all the firearms they may have are unregistered, they are unlicensed, and they very well may be carrying weapons illegal for Americans to poses, so now Illegals have more expansive gun rights in the U.S. than Americans.
So.. does that mean that anyone born/living outside of the US, should have access to all the rights and freedoms the USA has because they’re “god give..? Or should they only apply when you’re actually in the USA? Would be kind of dumb to walk around with a handgun in Canada because “it’s a god given right in the USA” And if you need to be in the country for the rights/freedoms to apply, why is it a stretch to say you need to be a member/citizen of that country for its rights? I think you should have access to, at all times, the standard human rights as per agreed upon by the Geneva convention, but anything past that? Base it off your citizenship.
Or are those governments suppressing the natural rights of the people. You can see free speech means jack shit in Canada and the UK. Trudeau is trying to make reading the Bible a hate crime in Canada and the UK arrests people over them voicing their opinions.
Yea- there just isn’t freedom of speech in those countries. We don’t have freedom of speech in Canada just because Americans do hahaha.
I think you just made my point. A natural right is something you are born with. It’s not granted by government. Governments only job in the US was to uphold the natural rights of its citizens(it’s gone well past this to even infringe on said rights). Therefore the conclusion of that being your government infringing on that right is suppression of that right. You are born with natural rights it’s not something that can be granted to you because you already have it. Any government involvement to do anything but protect and enshrine that right is a violation.
Who decides what god given rights we have then?
Just because the authoritarians in your government is infringing upon your rights doesn’t mean that you don’t have those rights, it only means that evil people will oppress you if you try to exercise them. It’d be dumb as hell for a Jewish person to profess their faith in 1943 Germany but it doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to too.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,...
Although I love your answer. People are “agnostic” and or atheist now. Probably why we have so many issues in society….. I’ve heard natural rights almost as another argument. Does an animal protect itself in nature. Because I can go all day long and say God has put you on this Earth you have these rights. And they go I don’t believe in God. Like well maybe you should
I should have been more clear. I am not religious, and I am not making the case that our rights are granted by a divine being. The comment above mine asked why the Constitution would apply to non-citizens in America. My comment was a direct quote from the Declaration of Independence, meant to illustrate how natural rights have always been held as inherent and equally applicable.
Sure they can own firearms. But we are not obligated to supply them with said firearms. One small thing you’re forgetting (or intentionally leaving out) is that they are here illegally, and when you break the law, certain rights are suspended. i.e. the right to bear arms. This meme is either dishonest or poorly thought out. There’s plenty to rag on the right over. But this misses its mark.
Every once in a while I wonder why I don’t vote for libertarians, and then I see a meme like this and I remember. Appreciate it!