Imad: He says, that is his horse.
Balian: Why would it be his horse?
Imad: Because it is on his land.
Balian: I took this horse from the sea.
Imad: He says you are a great liar, and he will fight you because you are a liar.
Balian: I have no desire to fight.
Imad: Then you must give him the horse.
[Balian draws his sword]
--Kingdom of Heaven
Isn't the central question whether individuals have the inalienable right to protect their person and property from forceful invasion by others?
If the answer to that question is yes, then doesn't any government imposed restriction (which of course is forceful itself) that impairs capacity for self-defense violate that right?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_2.gif)
2 comments:
Christ has set us free! This means we are really free. Now hold on to your freedom and don’t ever become slaves of the Law again.
~Galatians 5:1
If every man has the absolute right to his justly-held property it then follows that he has the right to keep that property – to defend it by violence against violent invasion.
To say that someone has the absolute right to a certain property but lacks the right to defend it against attack or invasion is also to say that he does not have total right to that property.
~Murray Rothbard
Post a Comment