buying/using gun

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10649
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Ceisiwr »

Mr Man
Nope. That is a falsehood. There is no right to own a gun in the UK. And I don't think there is anything in the sutta to support your view. Perhaps you are trying to pass off non-Buddhist ideas.
Human rights exist whether the state recognises them or not. So, whilst it’s true that it is currently illegal to own a firearm in the U.K. (mostly) it’s also true that owning a gun is a right. It’s simply the case that the U.K. government does not recognise said right. To give a more extreme example, North Korea does not recognise human rights. The people of North Korea however still do have their rights, it’s just the state does not recognise them and violates them. That’s why we call it a human rights violation. If rights were only valid when the state recognises them then we have to say that the people of North Korea do not have any human rights, that said rights do not apply to them. I happen to think they do, as human rights are inalienable. By this logic the right to self defence and gun ownership is a right, regardless of if parliament recognises that right.

Not all modern political positions will be found in the suttas. Still, they must still be informed by them. My Buddhist values are what inform my politics, which is why I support human rights.
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3934
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Mr Man »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 6:03 pm it’s also true that owning a gun is a right. It’s simply the case that the U.K. government does not recognise said right.
No, that is incorrect. Where do you believe the right to own a gun comes from?
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 6:03 pm Not all modern political positions will be found in the suttas. Still, they must still be informed by them. My Buddhist values are what inform my politics
How do Buddhist values inform your position that owning a gun is a "right".
santa100
Posts: 4494
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: buying/using gun

Post by santa100 »

No problem if you live in the States. People own more guns than kitchen knives here. And from the current political situation, one might need to use it for self defense come this Nov 3 US election, unfortunately...
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10649
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Ceisiwr »

Mr Man
No, that is incorrect. Where do you believe the right to own a gun comes from?
From our inalienable human rights. The rights every human has from birth simply by being human. Are you of the view that rights only exist when the state recognises them? If so that would mean there are no human rights violations in North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia and so on.
How do Buddhist values inform your position that owning a gun is a "right".
My Buddhist values lead me to support not stealing, killing or generally interfering with other humans and being opposed to others experiencing the same. This leads me to classical liberal negative rights as the basis of my politics.
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
[james]
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2015 7:07 pm

Re: buying/using gun

Post by [james] »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 5:12 pm [james]
You can use a gun without intention to kill.
How would you go about using that gun to defend your “rights” if you had no intention nor willingness to actually kill with it. Circumstances beyond your control might rapidly “require” you to do so.
[james] wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 5:05 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 3:20 pm Owning a gun doesn't mean you will kill someone.
It does mean that you are willing to kill someone.
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3934
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Mr Man »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 6:35 pm
No, that is incorrect. Where do you believe the right to own a gun comes from?
From our inalienable human rights. The rights every human has from birth simply by being human. Are you of the view that rights only exist when the state recognises them? If so that would mean there are no human rights violations in North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia and so on.
There are no "inalienable rights" that come from birth in the Buddha's teaching as far as I know. I believe that that concept is not supported. Are you saying that a baby has the "right" to own a gun? How about a tank? What does lead on from birth is death.

Rights come from society and shared values. International human rights violations come about when international laws and international values are ignored.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10649
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Ceisiwr »

[james]
How would you go about using that gun to defend your “rights” if you had no intention nor willingness to actually kill with it. Circumstances beyond your control might rapidly “require” you to do so.
To scare off or, if it comes to it, to disarm. The same with fists or a bat. You do not have to have the intention to kill to use a gun any more than when you use your fists.
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Sam Vara »

DNS wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 3:18 pm
confusedlayman wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 3:01 pm thanks. but i hate having weapons. i even prohibit the use of kitchen knife .. but i wont kill.
Then no need to have one. My parents lived in Israel for several years. They never owned a gun.
Indeed. I lived there in the 1980s when things were a lot less secure than now. People used guns for military service, so there were a lot of them on public display. But I didn't know anyone who owned one.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 13663
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: buying/using gun

Post by DNS »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 8:58 pm
DNS wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 3:18 pm
confusedlayman wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 3:01 pm thanks. but i hate having weapons. i even prohibit the use of kitchen knife .. but i wont kill.
Then no need to have one. My parents lived in Israel for several years. They never owned a gun.
Indeed. I lived there in the 1980s when things were a lot less secure than now. People used guns for military service, so there were a lot of them on public display. But I didn't know anyone who owned one.
I was there in the late 1970s for high school and what was bizarre (from an American perspective) was how the military personnel were everywhere and they all had their UZIs strapped on their shoulders, with most of them pointing down at a 45 degree angle so when you pass by them, the muzzle is pointed at you. In the U.S. the first thing we learn is to never point it at someone unless you need to use it. Even if you're 100% sure that it's unloaded, you still should never point it at someone, yet there they are, all pointing it at people passing by.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Sam Vara »

DNS wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:06 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 8:58 pm
DNS wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 3:18 pm

Then no need to have one. My parents lived in Israel for several years. They never owned a gun.
Indeed. I lived there in the 1980s when things were a lot less secure than now. People used guns for military service, so there were a lot of them on public display. But I didn't know anyone who owned one.
I was there in the late 1970s for high school and what was bizarre (from an American perspective) was how the military personnel were everywhere and they all had their UZIs strapped on their shoulders, with most of them pointing down at a 45 degree angle so when you pass by them, the muzzle is pointed at you. In the U.S. the first thing we learn is to never point it at someone unless you need to use it. Even if you're 100% sure that it's unloaded, you still should never point it at someone, yet there they are, all pointing it at people passing by.
I remember being on a bus and a most attractive young woman sat next to me. She fell asleep, and started lolling against me. I quite liked it, apart from the flash-hider on her M16 pressing into my cheek...
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10649
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Ceisiwr »

Mr Man
There are no "inalienable rights" that come from birth in the Buddha's teaching as far as I know. I believe that that concept is not supported. Are you saying that a baby has the "right" to own a gun? How about a tank? What does lead on from birth is death.
You are right. The concept of human rights does not exist in the Dhamma. Plenty of modern concepts do not come directly from the suttas, such as gay marriage or adoption, but they can be supported on Buddhist principles and are not inherently against the Dhamma. The Buddha taught some basic morality for householders, so we can avoid the worst kamma or situations that lead to it, as well as concepts such as the 4 immeasurables. As Buddhists living in 2020 we can then use these basic moral principles and meta-concepts to inform our politics, should we wish to be politically active or to express an opinion on political matters. Of course as people's perceptions, experiences and understanding differ there will be different conclusions reached by Buddhists regarding worldly matters and politics despite us sharing the same religion and intentions. For me, when it comes to worldly matters and politics human rights are the best way to navigate the world whilst staying true to Buddhist principles. I see nothing in human rights which goes against the Dhamma and plenty of ways that they are compatible with the Dhamma. As I have then adopted the view of human rights it follows that I see these rights as being inalienable. Part of that worldview is that all people have a right to self defense and to bear arms.

Babies and children have human rights. When they come of age they can then own a gun, if the state recognises said right. Until they are an adult they are under the protection of their mother and father, or guardian. In the US I believe you can own a tank, if you can afford it.
Rights come from society and shared values. International human rights violations come about when international laws and international values are ignored.
They came from the minds of philosophers and were not widely supported when initially thought of by society at large. Rights and the concept of liberty were also met with violent opposition and still today authoritarians and totalitarians of every stripe despise the concept. In the west the most vocal opposition now comes from "Progressives". Rights then existed before society and the state accepted them. You can of course believe that humans only have human rights when the law states that they do. Its not a position I would fill, but you can take that place if you wish. That would mean, however, that countries like North Korea are not violating the human rights of their population. Falling back on international law doesn't help much either. To give an example, Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries refused to sign up to the UN Deceleration of Human Rights. By your logic, they were then not violating the rights of their citizens as they were not bound by international law nor did any state law acknowledge said rights. By my logic, they were violating rights. Also by your logic, if a country pulls out of international treaties regarding rights and then abolishes rights legislation in their country then they are not violating any rights, since the laws do not exist or apply. By my logic, they are. My position then is that rights are a deontological moral principle that are required for there to be the free and fair society. A society that is closest in line with the Dhamma. The law then can either acknowledge or ignore someone's rights, but they can never take them away. They can only ever violate them, or not.

Rights then to me are a moral principle and a legal one. It seems for you they are only legal concepts.
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
[james]
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2015 7:07 pm

Re: buying/using gun

Post by [james] »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 8:08 pm [james]
How would you go about using that gun to defend your “rights” if you had no intention nor willingness to actually kill with it. Circumstances beyond your control might rapidly “require” you to do so.
To scare off or, if it comes to it, to disarm. The same with fists or a bat. You do not have to have the intention to kill to use a gun any more than when you use your fists.
So you are using a killing tool as a bluff, unmindful, it seems, of the fact that the presence of a killing tool in a contentious encounter can lead to a cascade of circumstances that are difficult to foresee, much less control. What if your bluff is dismissed?
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10649
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Ceisiwr »

[james] wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 12:24 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 8:08 pm [james]
How would you go about using that gun to defend your “rights” if you had no intention nor willingness to actually kill with it. Circumstances beyond your control might rapidly “require” you to do so.
To scare off or, if it comes to it, to disarm. The same with fists or a bat. You do not have to have the intention to kill to use a gun any more than when you use your fists.
So you are using a killing tool as a bluff, unmindful, it seems, of the fact that the presence of a killing tool in a contentious encounter can lead to a cascade of circumstances that are difficult to foresee, much less control. What if your bluff is dismissed?
Then shoot to wound/disarm.
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
[james]
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2015 7:07 pm

Re: buying/using gun

Post by [james] »

Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 12:51 am Then shoot to wound/disarm.
You are skilled with a gun then and the situations where gun use may seem suitable.
And, if not so skilled, you kill your adversary, would that be unforeseen, accidental, unintentional?
Guns, weapons, carry people from dark places to even darker places.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10649
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: buying/using gun

Post by Ceisiwr »

[james] wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 1:15 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 12:51 am Then shoot to wound/disarm.
You are skilled with a gun then and the situations where gun use may seem suitable.
And, if not so skilled, you kill your adversary, would that be unforeseen, accidental, unintentional?
Guns, weapons, carry people from dark places to even darker places.
I live in the U.K. For the most part we aren’t allowed guns. Accidentally killing a being is not bad kamma. We aren’t Jains. You can accidentally kill someone with a single punch, if you are a strong man. If we take monks, they are still allowed to defend themselves with blows. If they accidentally kill someone while defending themselves then they are not at fault.

Using a gun to defend oneself is fine as long as it’s for self defence and to disarm/scare away. If there is a confrontation and the person dies from the gun shot there is no fault on the part of the person who shot them, as long as he did not intend to kill said person.
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
Post Reply