{"id":12227,"date":"2009-11-12T13:58:51","date_gmt":"2009-11-12T13:58:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2009\/11\/12\/peter-lupu-on-my-gun-rights-argument\/"},"modified":"2009-11-12T13:58:51","modified_gmt":"2009-11-12T13:58:51","slug":"peter-lupu-on-my-gun-rights-argument","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2009\/11\/12\/peter-lupu-on-my-gun-rights-argument\/","title":{"rendered":"Peter Lupu on My Gun Rights Argument"},"content":{"rendered":"

A guest post by Peter Lupu.  Editing by BV.   BV will respond to PL in the ComBox.  Here in his own words is the argument<\/a> that BV presented:<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

1. Every human person possesses a natural right to life.
<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

2. If every human person has a natural right to life, then he has a right to defend his life against those who would seek to violate this right.
<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

3. If every human person has a right to defend his life, then he has a right to an effective means of defending his life.
<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Therefore
<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

4. Every human person has a right to an effective means of defending his life. (From 1, 2, 3 by Modus Ponens and Hypothetical Syllogism.)
<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

5. In many circumstances, a gun is the only effective means of defending one's life.
<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Therefore
<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

6. In many circumstances, human persons have a right to possess guns, a right that is not conferred by constitutions but ought to be respected by them.
<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In \u201cDeriving Gun Rights from the Right to Life\u201d<\/a> Bill presented a powerful argument on behalf of gun rights that is grounded on the right to life. The argument is based on the assumption that the right to life is a natural right and, hence, is logically prior to positive law, where by positive law we mean a law that is enacted by society. In addition to the principle that natural rights are logically prior to positive law, Bill\u2019s argument features two additional very important principles. <\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The first principle is that natural rights supersede positive law: i.e., since natural rights are logically prior to positive law, a society is not morally justified to enact any positive laws that restrict or in any way impinge upon natural rights. I shall call this principle the \u201cRights Trump Law\u201d principle or the Trump-Principle. <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

The second principle is stated in the form of premise 3. ["3. If every human person has a right to defend his life, then he has a right to an effective means of defending his life."]  <\/font>This premise is based upon the intuition that the force of natural rights extends or is transferable to the means required to protect them. I shall call this principle the Principle of Transference of Rights (PTR, in short). PTR means that persons have a natural right not merely to their life but also to the means required to defend their life, including whatever means are the most effective in securing such a defense. And, of course, if the natural right to life extends to the means required to secure this right, then the means required to secure this right must also be included in the scope of the Trump-Principle: i.e., it is not morally justified for a society to enact positive laws which in any way deprive individuals who have a right to life from obtaining the most effective *means* to defend this right. PTR in effect extends the Trump-Principle from natural rights to the means of securing these rights. <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

Thus, if the possession of guns proves to be an effective means for individuals to secure their right to life, then it is not morally justified for society to prohibit such individuals from the ownership of guns. <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

I agree with Bill about the following: <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

(a) Persons have a natural right to life and this right is logically prior to positive law;<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

(b) I agree with the Trump-Principle: i.e., natural rights supersede positive law;<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

(c) Bill\u2019s argument is valid;<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

(d) Bill\u2019s argument is sound only if PTR is correct in an unrestricted form. <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

In the present post, I wish to focus on whether the Principle of the Transference of Rights is correct in an unrestricted form. Thus, I am not interested to debate the question of whether persons have gun rights. If Bill\u2019s argument is sound, then they do. If it is not, then they may or may not. My only concern here is the cogency and scope of PTR. Is PTR cogent and is its scope unrestricted? There are three possibilities:<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

(A) PTR is always false: i.e., even if persons have a natural right to life, the force of such rights NEVER extends to the means required to secure such rights;<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

(B) PTR is always true: i.e., if persons have a natural right to life, the force of such rights ALWAYS extends to the means required to secure such rights;<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

(C) PTR is sometimes true: the natural right to life sometimes extends to the means required to secure it and sometimes does not. <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

Notice that if (A) is true, then the Trump-Principle ["Rights trump law"] fails to extend to any means required to secure natural rights. By contrast, if (B) is true, then the Trump-Principle extends to any means required to secure these rights. However, if (C) happens to be true, then the Trump-Principle extends in some cases and does not in others. <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

I maintain that both (A) and (B) are unreasonable. I hope we can agree on this proposition. Therefore, only (C) is a viable candidate. However, notice that if (C) is the only viable candidate, then Bill\u2019s argument is unsound as it stands. For in order for Bill\u2019s argument to go through, he needs premise (3) in an unrestricted form. But, premise (3) in an unrestricted form requires that case (B) holds. Since we have agreed that (B) is unreasonable, premise (3) is false as it stands. Bill needs a further argument to show that PTR holds specifically in the cases where the means to protect the natural right to life requires the ownership of guns. Only then can he invoke the Trump-Principle in order to secure gun ownership against restrictions by positive law. And so far as I can see, Bill\u2019s original post failed to do so.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A guest post by Peter Lupu.  Editing by BV.   BV will respond to PL in the ComBox.  Here in his own words is the argument that BV presented: 1. Every human person possesses a natural right to life. 2. If every human person has a natural right to life, then he has a right to defend his … Continue reading “Peter Lupu on My Gun Rights Argument”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[112,311,48],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12227","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-alcohol-tobacco-and-firearms","category-rights-and-duties","category-social-and-political-philosophy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12227","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12227"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12227\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12227"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12227"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12227"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}