Journal Stargoat's Journal: inalienable rights to defense 3
The right to defense of person and property is unalienable. Whether or not the majority votes it away, the individual may always defend himself, his family, and his property. The thief has surrendered his right to life and liberty by violating another man's rights.
Does this mean that the man serving the state when it attempts to remove rights to life, liberty and property also has surrendered his right to life and liberty?
Does this mean that the man serving the state when it attempts to remove rights to life, liberty and property also has surrendered his right to life and liberty?
For the sake of argument.. (Score:1)
Yes
Committing a crime for the state is no different than doing it for any other reason.
not quite. (Score:2)
The thief does not surrender his right to life. And the extent to which he surrenders his right to property is circumscribed by law. He surrenders his right to liberty, for a time prescribed by law. As a moral matter, the thief working for the state should be treated comparably, perhaps with some leeway given to the extent that the state's action is arguably moral--someone should, in uncertain areas, be able to rely on the state's interpretation of thievery. But in areas where it is entirely clear that