Political Crossfire Forums

[Sixgun_Symphony]

Quote: A. Self-defence as an exemption to criminal responsibility, not a human right
20. Self-defence is a widely recognized, yet legally proscribed, exception to the universal duty to respect the right to life of others. Self-defence is a basis for exemption from criminal responsibility that can be raised by any State agent or non-State actor. Self-defence is sometimes designated as a “right”. There is inadequate legal support for such an interpretation. Self-defence is more properly characterized as a means of protecting the right to life and, as such, a basis for avoiding responsibility for violating the rights of another.

21. No international human right of self-defence is expressly set forth in the primary sources of international law: treaties, customary law, or general principles. While the right to life is recognized in virtually every major international human rights treaty, the principle of self-defence is expressly recognized in only one, the Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights), article 2.15 Self-defence, however, is not recognized as a right in the European Convention on Human Rights. According to one commentator, “The function of this provision is simply to remove from the scope of application of article 2 (1) killings necessary to defend against unlawful violence. It does not provide a right that must be secured by the State”.16



*click here*


This should make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside about the wonderful "One World" that's coming up! Remember, don't pester the men with machetes when they come for you! And please, step quietly and orderly onto the railroad cars for the trip north; you'll just love the scenery!

Thank you Michael Bane

[lilwolf]

Not good... Well if and when little blue helmets come to bother me, I react in self defense...and little blue helmets are in the street.

They also want gun control:

worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33584

[Ardent]

The UN Declaration of Human Rights is not international law.

The Geneva Convention and Hague Convention form international law, although why Americans are getting so upset about international law is beyond me - you don't take any notice of the Geneva convention so why would you take any notice of any other international law. :roll:

[lilwolf]

Cheap shot and wrong fully said sir.

We as americans helped put the geneva convention together and it is followed for the most part except by stupid people.

The UN has made statements that gun control is an aim of theirs and that the US is a hinderance to their overall control.
Do you deny one world government is not already happening?

The article is not talking about human rights ardent it is saying that self defense is not a right.. So in other words you have no right to self defense under their definations. That is all it says.

[leftneckredwing]

A supranational org like the UN has no jurisdiction in the US.

It is a parasitic blight on humankind and should be forced to move to France or cease to exist all together.

It is anything but a representative of United Nations. It is a body that sets it's own agendas and through it's actions has managed to put many 3rd world countries in eternal debt, through the IMF, the World Bank and other such 'lending' orgs.

Down with the UN. The quicker the better.

[lilwolf]

I fully agree...Close up the snake pit and kick it out of our nation.. Hell I'll pay the expense (what I could anyway) to implode the building and I would even volunteer to drive a garbage truck to carry it all away.

They are a parasite outfit that has done no good for decades and needs to go to france where they might fit in better... get my drift :wink:

[Ardent]

lilwolf wrote: Cheap shot and wrong fully said sir.

We as americans helped put the geneva convention together and it is followed for the most part except by stupid people.

The UN has made statements that gun control is an aim of theirs and that the US is a hinderance to their overall control.
Do you deny one world government is not already happening?

The article is not talking about human rights ardent it is saying that self defense is not a right.. So in other words you have no right to self defense under their definations. That is all it says.

According to the Bush Administration the Geneva Convention is 'quaint'
and is no longer relevant.

Calling PoW's Enemy Combatants and housing them at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay in order to not breach American Laws doesn't fool any one. The Geneva Convention it seems only applies to American prisoners and not so called rag heads.

The UN is not an international legal body and as I have already stated the UN Human Rights Declaration is not Law - it's simple a list of principles and guidelines for UN Members and takes no precedence over national laws or international treaties.

[leftneckredwing]

lilwolf wrote: I fully agree...Close up the snake pit and kick it out of our nation.. Hell I'll pay the expense (what I could anyway) to implode the building and I would even volunteer to drive a garbage truck to carry it all away.

They are a parasite outfit that has done no good for decades and needs to go to france where they might fit in better... get my drift :wink:

Good copy on that. I read you lima charley.

Let them go over there where they think Jerry Lewis is the greatest comic ever and they have banned burkhas. It is not a free country and should welcome a beacon to control and impotence.

[leftneckredwing]

Ardent wrote: lilwolf wrote: Cheap shot and wrong fully said sir.

We as americans helped put the geneva convention together and it is followed for the most part except by stupid people.

The UN has made statements that gun control is an aim of theirs and that the US is a hinderance to their overall control.
Do you deny one world government is not already happening?

The article is not talking about human rights ardent it is saying that self defense is not a right.. So in other words you have no right to self defense under their definations. That is all it says.

According to the Bush Administration the Geneva Convention is 'quaint'
and is no longer relevant.

Calling PoW's Enemy Combatants and housing them at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay in order to not breach American Laws doesn't fool any one. The Geneva Convention it seems only applies to American prisoners and not so called rag heads.

The UN is not an international legal body and as I have already stated the UN Human Rights Declaration is not Law - it's simple a list of principles and guidelines for UN Members and takes no precedence over national laws or international treaties.

Well, yeah, we've got our own problems and if anything, the UN has played their hand to magnify and legitimise some of those problems.

If, people did not have this impotent supranational org to point fingers at, we would have to take a harder look in our own mirror.

[Ardent]

The UN does a difficult job trying to represent the views of all it's members
and seek appriopriate action.

Whilst the UN may not be perfect it is better than having no international body at all.

There are plans to reform the UN in order to make it more effective - but how much more effective the UN will be after reform is subject to question.

[leftneckredwing]

Ardent wrote: The UN does a difficult job trying to represent the views of all it's members
and seek appriopriate action.

Whilst the UN may not be perfect it is better than having no international body at all.

There are plans to reform the UN in order to make it more effective - but how much more effective the UN will be after reform is subject to question.

The more they try to impose international law, the more ineffective they will be.

I don't see that we wouldn't be better off without it.

Resolutions are imposed randomly.

[Ardent]

Not all international organisations are failures though - look at NATO which is currently growing in membership and has become a potent international force against terrorism and genocide whether it be in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa or elsewhere in the world.

[micfranklin]

The U.N. hasn't really been much help as of late, and I refuse to take them seriously for whatever reason. Self-defense and right to bear arms go hand-in-hand, if you ask me.

[lilwolf]

Hey Ardent, since when are enemy combatants entitled to the same laws and rights as american citizens?

The enemy is the enemy and pure and simple put them in a place where they can be detained and then done as is appropriate under military law.

Basically the UN is a s***hole that needs closed or sent to France or somewhere that would like a house full of devaints and crooks, all of which are parasites..

[Ardent]

lilwolf wrote: Hey Ardent, since when are enemy combatants entitled to the same laws and rights as american citizens?

The enemy is the enemy and pure and simple put them in a place where they can be detained and then done as is appropriate under military law.

Basically the UN is a s***hole that needs closed or sent to France or somewhere that would like a house full of devaints and crooks, all of which are parasites..

The US called it's prisoners Enemy Combatants as opposed to PoW's to avoid the Geneva Convention Laws regarding Prisoners of War.

These 'enemy combatants' were housed at the US Navy Facility on Cuba in
order to avoid US Constitutional Law - and the Supreme Court recently ruled that they must not be tried in Military Law but in Civilian Courts.

It's all very well saying the enemy is the enemy and we will do what we please - but why sign the Geneva Convention in the first place.

[lilwolf]

Ardent create a thread somewhere other than Gun control so this could be argued. The whole issue of human right and self defense is the issuse, some some friggin clown setting on his ass in Gitmo.
Lets all stick with the subject what do you say.

[leftneckredwing]

Ardent wrote: Not all international organisations are failures though - look at NATO which is currently growing in membership and has become a potent international force against terrorism and genocide whether it be in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa or elsewhere in the world.

You mean like in Afghanistan where the already burgeoning opium trade has produced another 59% increase in crop output? A full third above what the world wide clientele now intakes?

They run taliban out of one area, vacate and then have to retake it.

Afghanistan will never be occupied in perpetuity. Ask Alexander the Great. He had the longest most successful occupation and he still got his ass run off. And so will NATO.

[lilwolf]

BINGO......leftneck,,,absolutely right.

[Ardent]

BBC News

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Bush administration does not have the authority to try terrorism suspects by military tribunal.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5129904.stm

[leftneckredwing]

Ardent wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5129904.stm

Honestly Ardent, no one gives a s**t about any of that in the gun forum.

Lilwolf is right, take it elsewhere, except in cases where it relates to gun issues.