Guns Rights vs. Abortion Rights by Robert Farago | Jun 01, 2016 | 79 comments facebook twitter linkedin email Abortion is a right, apparently. If we accept that principle, this video isn’t wrong. Is it? comments Chris. says: June 1, 2016 at 16:10 I could see the ultra-sound being a good thing. I think my trigger finger has a little repetitive motion injury. Reply Z says: June 1, 2016 at 16:14 Personally, I think they could both use less restriction and government interference. Reply sagebrushracer says: June 1, 2016 at 16:21 bingo. Your right to your person and property should not be infringed buy others. Simply because everybody cannot agree on any particular course of action. Just because someone does not agree does not negate my right to my person or property. Reply Derek says: June 2, 2016 at 08:05 Your premise is correct, and just as nobody has the right to your person, nobody should have the right to a person who is yet to be born. The founders were very clear about the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You cannot have happiness sans liberty nor liberty sans life. While reasonable people can disagree about when life is actually a separate human being with rights, separate heartbeat, separate brain activity, and viability out of womb are all excellent places to start. I find it interesting that many people who “love the constitution” fail to understand the importance of its entirety. The state nowhere has the enumerated powers to authorize the termination of human beings. Reply David Schuring says: June 1, 2016 at 16:16 They’re two separate issues, we should keep them that way… Reply -Peter says: June 1, 2016 at 16:27 ^ This. Abortion is not in the constitution. Abortion also directly impacts the rights of at least two other people (the biological father and the unborn baby), unlike gun ownership. Keep the issues separate. Reply uncommon_sense says: June 1, 2016 at 17:10 ^ And this! I stated in another post earlier today that we must not let Progressives define the narrative. This is no exception. We should not compare impediments to firearm acquisition with impediments to abortion. Reply cenonce says: June 1, 2016 at 20:15 Well, it is. It’s just not explicitly stated. You may not agree with the Supreme Court’s decision on that, but that’s what it is, which puts it on equal footing as the right to bear arms as a fundamental right. Reply Cliff H says: June 2, 2016 at 09:04 Abortion is a “right” that the Supreme Court somehow found within the wording of the Constitution. The Second Amendment is part of the original “Bill of Rights” and is unambiguous in its terminology and meaning. Reply Matt says: June 2, 2016 at 15:04 If that were truly the case, we wouldn’t still be arguing about it 200+ years later. DJ says: June 1, 2016 at 16:16 One is anonymous… Reply Art out West says: June 1, 2016 at 18:38 Abortion terminates an innocent human life. It is murder. Guns, are just tools. They are used for a variety of tasks. Unfortunately, they are sometimes used for murder. I suppose the accurate thing to compare guns with in this situation would be “surgical tools”. Surgical tools and guns, are both used to protect life, and to destroy life. Reply danny gonzalez says: June 2, 2016 at 13:31 +1 Reply alexander says: June 3, 2016 at 01:36 Not an intellectually honest argument – you can’t deny that the primary purpose of a gun is to kill people. Some people need to be killed, but killing is its main purpose. Just being honest about. Reply AZmark says: June 1, 2016 at 16:18 I must have missed it in the constitution. Where does it say “the right to abort babies shall not be infringed”. This is the problem with judicial advocacy. As soon as a left leaning Judge gets placed on the supreme court they will interpret the second amendment as being a right of the state. Somewhere they “found” the constitutional right to gay marrige, healthcare, and abortion. Next they will find the right to income, jobs, housing. mao, stalin, lenin are smiling in their graves. Reply Joe R. says: June 1, 2016 at 16:34 It doesn’t say it in the decision either https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/410/113 . “ When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” – First Para. U.S. Declaration of independence. That’s an open and ongoing consideration. The 2nd Amendment is the small guarantee for all U.S. men to be able to execute on that mutual promise. Abortion is the taking of a life of an innocent individual created by the strict invitation of another. If that does not warrant the label of ‘monster’, humankind has never created one. Reply alexander says: June 4, 2016 at 18:03 Actually, the Constitution is very clear on that: it lists enumerated rights and responsibilities that the federal government has. Only those rights, and none other, specifically. The abortion is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. Therefore,anyone who considers this Constitution as a rule of law, must admit that the federal government needs to be barred from interfering with this issue from any direction. Of course, who the hell follows museum relics? Reply Frank Masotti says: June 1, 2016 at 16:20 OK, but, buying a gun would be FREE and paid for by the government. Not to mention children would be able to get them without parent consent in some states. Is this what they really want? Reply Rusty Chains says: June 1, 2016 at 16:27 And they would need to provide free ammunition in middle school, like they give away condoms, and while we are on that roll (or is it unroll), they would have to provide gun education in the schools! Reply CLarson says: June 1, 2016 at 16:47 Cool! Where’s my OBAMAGUN!? I don’t live in Mexico so I missed out the first time. 🙁 Reply dh34 says: June 1, 2016 at 18:03 Golf clap, sir! Reply Jim in Conroe says: June 1, 2016 at 16:24 Considering that abortions are the cause of nearly 700,000 intentional deaths per year, while guns are involved in some 30,000 deaths (11,000 of which were homicides and 21,000 suicides, plus some 500 accidental deaths), abortion should be restricted to a far greater extent than the purchase of firearms. On the other hand, since vehicles are involved in some 30,000 deaths per year, maybe more restrictions are required on the purchase and operation of motor vehicles – like a background check, in some states a waiting period, the requirement that you be 18, and that you be a US citizen or permanent resident. Reply Max says: June 4, 2016 at 23:21 Actually, over 950,000 unborn children were killed in the U.S. last year. Reply NYC2AZ says: June 1, 2016 at 16:24 Another 300+ comment abortion thread? Reply peirsonb says: June 1, 2016 at 16:56 “Dude, I’m telling you, we don’t want any part of this. Let’s just go play trucks.” – Stan Marsh Reply NYC2AZ says: June 1, 2016 at 17:25 +1 Christopher Reeve Reply int19h says: June 1, 2016 at 16:59 Meh. This topic has been discussed here ad infinitum. There really isn’t anything else to be said about it. And it STILL doesn’t have anything to do with guns. Reply NYC2AZ says: June 1, 2016 at 17:26 I completely agree, but it didn’t stop the last one from going north of the 300 comment mark. Reply Tile floor says: June 1, 2016 at 17:35 As I posted on the Gorilla thread, must we keep bringing up abortion stuff on a gun website? Seriously I come here for gun reviews, gear reviews, gun news, and gun politics. Not abortion, bathrooms, or any of that other stuff. Please stick to the truth about guns, not etc. but I’m sure it’s about to be debated ad infinitum on this thread 16V says: June 2, 2016 at 00:06 The Truth About Payin’ the Bills… Joe R. says: June 2, 2016 at 08:51 It is a lib-prog-comm (D) problem. That’s a connection. The gov’t bringing you this stuff is only half as bad as those that continue to vote for it. MikeJH121 says: June 1, 2016 at 16:27 These people are absolute MORONS. I see ARMS (GUNS) are in the Constitution. I do not see abortion mentioned anywhere. And if we wanna campare as does Glam..blah More than 56 Million abortions have been performed since 1973. 56 MILLION dead no where near gun deaths accidental or otherwise. 56 Million is closer to the around 120 million that Communist/Totalitarian gov’s have killed. But hey they were just making thier societies better ridding them of the unwated. Uninformed, of which are about the same number as deaths by gov’s will see this and say, makes sense to me. The Zombies are waiting, they are those who do not do for themselves. When other peoples (WE) can or will no longer contribute the politicians will be the first they eat. WE on the other hand have guns and wil defend ourselves. They cannot. Call 911 when you no longer get an answer, what next. Or your cell phone has quit. Or the cops are all on their way to defend their own families. Ohh the boogy man is out there but it is not an inanimate object like a scary looking gun. Its those who keep promising all the free stuff. Live blind and you live in chains. Reply Andrew Lias says: June 1, 2016 at 16:38 Well, lets try this then: -You can’t go across state lines for an abortion without federal approval -You have to wait a varying degree of day per state (California is a month, NJ is 6 months to a year) to get an abortion. -Abortion techniques will be disallowed depending on how scary looking they are. It doesn’t matter how effective, safe or efficient they are. -Abortions are not allowed for anyone who is a felon no matter the crime, does drugs, has mental problems that involved commitment, had a domestic abuse complaint or is an illegal immigrant. Yes that includes weed even in states where legal. -A background check is mandatory before an abortion is performed. -Abortions may only be done if the abortions are on a “safe roster” that only abortion techniques which haven’t even been invented and/or are not proven effective are required. -Chief Law Enforcement Officer sign off and fingerprinting for any abortion that isn’t “standard” -in San Fran Cisco you couldn’t put any signs up indicating you did abortion due to “community impact.” -The records of concealed abortion clients would be turned over to and published in NY. -If you lived in public housing chances are you wouldn’t be able to get an abortion -You can only get abortions in places where they don’t have signs up forbidding it in many states. The signs save lives after all. -Abortions would be “shall issue” in certain states, which means they wouldn’t actually ever be allowed. -Abortions are flat out banned in certain areas, which means if you live there you are SOL. -There would be a group of people that would say what an abortion is and isn’t, there would be a complex set of ever shifting legalities around it that could send you to prison for a decade due to committing the dangerous crime of not sating the bureaucrats. -Abortion equipment would be able to have less than 10 foreign made parts in it. -I would say that you would be limited to 10 abortions or less except that may be somewhat macabre. BTW, not a push for Hillary at all is it? Am I missing anything? How about this, you get your abortions and I’ll get my firearms. Reply notalima says: June 1, 2016 at 17:24 Microstamping? In CA: The person receiving the abortion shall be permanently marked, in a visible location, for each abortion received. The marking shall not be defaced or obscured and must be made available to public officials for inspection and validation. Reply uncommon_sense says: June 1, 2016 at 17:35 Good post. And how about these whoppers: — You have to send a check for $200 to a federal agency in order to get a tax stamp and you cannot proceed with your abortion until you have your tax stamp in hand. (Note that it often takes 6+ months to get your tax stamp.) Oh, and if you want to take your tax stamp and abortion to another state, you have to notify that federal agency in writing. — You can only get an abortion if you were born in 1986 or earlier. — If you get a false positive on your background check, you cannot proceed with your abortion. — You have to fill out a form 4473 and include lots of specific personal identifying information before you can have an abortion. If you intentionally lie on the form, you are guilty of a felony. — If someone else pays for your abortion, it is a “straw-abortion” and that is a felony. On top of that, you are both guilty of a felony for conspiracy to pay for an abortion contrary to law. — You must first acquire an abortion owner identification card (A.O.I.D.) before you can get an abortion. — You must have proof of an 8-hour training class that teaches the dangers of abortion and safe personal care after an abortion in order to get an (A.O.I.D.) card. — You cannot drive to or from the abortion clinic in a car unless your stomach is empty and you are locked in a container inside the vehicle or trunk and inaccessible to the driver. — When driving to or from the abortion clinic, you cannot stop at a restaurant or gas station along the way. — When driving to or from the abortion clinic, if a law enforcement officer pulls over the vehicle, the driver must immediately inform the law enforcement officer that an abortion patient is in the vehicle. — Your Abortion Owner Identifcation (A.O.I.D.) card is only valid in your state of residence and you cannot get an abortion in another state. — Any medication that you plan to take before or after your abortion must be in a locked safe and inaccessible to children. — If someone steals your abortion medication, you must notify police within 48 hours of the theft. — Of course you must have an Abortion Owner Identification (A.O.I.D.) card in order to get your abortion medication at a licensed pharmacy. — You must register your abortion medication at the local police department. — Anyone who does not have an Abortion Owner Identifcation (A.O.I.D.) card cannot legally touch you at the abortion clinic. Neither can they legally touch your abortion medication. — “Abortion Free School Zones” extend 1000 feet beyond every school and you shall not walk/drive into an “Abortion Free School Zone” on your way to or from the abortion clinic unless you have a license from your state of residence to be within said “Abortion Free School Zone”. Shall we continue? Reply ARluv says: June 2, 2016 at 12:29 You can have an abortion, but if the during the abortion any part of the procedure touches your shoulder, you’ve redesigned the abortion and now it’s a felony crime with up to 10 years in prison and $250,000 fine. Reply Angryaz says: June 1, 2016 at 16:40 Free guns on demand this might not be so oooh bad……. and I can go shoot off as much as I want and someone else will buy me reloads niiiiice Reply Geoff PR says: June 2, 2016 at 08:27 Uh, they will tell you who to shoot, and you can’t say no unless you want a long prison sentence… (And who you shoot will be shooting back at *you*) Reply TravisP says: June 1, 2016 at 16:43 Okay, cool, as long as the government gives half a billion dollars to form some Midway USA locations, where underprivileged gun owners can get their guns fixed at little or no cost, and subsidize the cost of firearms for the underprivileged. We can go ahead and get rid of background checks to, as well as IDs for buying guns. Also minors should be able to get a gun without their parent’s consent. Also I’ll need the government, and my job to provide ammunition and accessories for my guns as part of my insurance. I’ll also need time off to go shooting during the work day, so I’ll get regular leave, sick leave, and range leave. Reply Mike J says: June 1, 2016 at 16:54 What the video shows us is that we have millions of people who should have been aborted running loose in this country, and some are state legislators. Personally, I’m opposed to voluntary abortion simply because it’s a foolish policy. What we need is compulsory abortion for convicts, welfare recipients, mental patients, and Democratic voters generally. Reply Indiana Tom says: June 1, 2016 at 16:55 Abortion is a Margaret Sanger racist eugenics program anyway. She might even be better at killing off people than Hitler in the long run. Reply Stinkeye says: June 1, 2016 at 16:58 “I been fishin’ for clicks in these waters all my life, boy. Let me tell you, ain’t no bait better than that aborshun stuff. Best clickbait there is, yessir.” Reply Vhyrus says: June 1, 2016 at 17:00 Winner Reply Warlocc says: June 2, 2016 at 11:09 Ding ding ding. Reply Shandower says: June 2, 2016 at 16:26 Yeeeeeup. Reply Pond Avenue says: June 1, 2016 at 17:04 I got caught by a cop in California once back in the old days with an illegally concealed abortion. Fortunately, he let me off. I was on the way home from my night shift at the prison. Wait, maybe that was my melatin-beautified Queen. I can’t remember, it’s been so long. Reply CalGunsMD says: June 1, 2016 at 17:05 Never thought I’d be thankful that abortion is more loosely regulated in this country than it is in europe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHrihwWJv8o Reply YZAS says: June 1, 2016 at 17:06 Classic Straw Man BS Reply Ralph says: June 1, 2016 at 17:12 Guns and abortions? Knowing what I know of my fellow man, I’d say that in many cases both should be compulsory. Reply VF 1777 says: June 1, 2016 at 17:14 Question for the kiddies at Glamour: Complete the sentence accurately: “…being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to…. a) …undergo an abortion. b) …keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Now don’t get me wrong, I support YOUR freedom to decide if you want to have an abortion. Why don’t you support MY right to decide if I want to keep and bear arms in order to defend my life and the lives of my family and loved ones? Hypocrisy? Ignorance? Selfishness? Stupidity? Just Brainwashed? Which one is it? Reply Wilson says: June 1, 2016 at 17:43 “Why don’t you support MY right to decide if I want to keep and bear arms in order to defend my life and the lives of my family and loved ones?” The answer is in your question. An abortion doesn’t give you the ability to defend your life and the lives of your family and loved ones from our “benevolent” overlords which is exactly what progressives want to be. Reply Anonymous says: June 1, 2016 at 17:20 Few things. 1) Buying a gun has no victim. Possessing a gun has no victim. Carrying a gun has no victim. It is against the law to murder people with anything (knives, guns, fists, etc). 2) This is America. Land of the Free… Home of the Brave. Remember? Not land of the not free, home of cowardice seeking safety and communist style laws and law enforcement. Right?? Right??? 3) Killing babies in the womb or outside of it, where a baby is a victim, (usually) because of irresponsible actions of one or more of the parents, does not in anyway compare to the victimless crime of purchasing a gun. Reply Wilson says: June 1, 2016 at 17:45 A typical lefty argument An apples to oranges comparison accompanied by an attempt to claim victim status. Reply A A Ron says: June 1, 2016 at 17:52 The disconnect I see is that the people who are most adamantly vocal about the individuals right to keep and bear arms are the same people who are most adamantly vocal against a person right to govern their own body. Reply 10mm says: June 2, 2016 at 08:58 +1 Doesn’t matter if you like it, Roe v Wade is just as valid as DC v Heller. Welcome to Democracy. Reply FormerWaterWalker says: June 1, 2016 at 17:52 One’s a right-one is a black robbed right…like dudes marrying each other or tranny’s hangin’ out in the girls locker room… Reply Ralph says: June 1, 2016 at 19:10 tranny’s hangin’ out in the girls locker room… I would find trans hanging out in the boys locker room to be far more disturbing. Not that there’s anything wrong with it . . . . Reply Clay says: June 1, 2016 at 18:19 Are they associating guns with abortion violence? Reply Anonymous says: June 1, 2016 at 22:48 That’s right. Stabbing a baby in the brain is pure violence. Reply Milsurp Collector says: June 1, 2016 at 18:25 What if a gun were as difficult to get an abortion? In my state, the former is VASTLY more difficult to purchase than the latter. Reply S.CROCK says: June 1, 2016 at 18:27 It should be as hard to buy an inanimate object as it is to kill someone? Hmmm no thanks. Reply C. Z. says: June 1, 2016 at 19:18 I think this is a beautiful highlight of how the antis on each side try to slice away at a right bit by bit until that right is no longer a right. We all ought to learn something about how to we should be equating gun rights to voting rights or free speech rights, or the right of assembly. Reply Ralph says: June 1, 2016 at 19:19 Since when does anyone need a license and a background check to get an abortion? I thought they only needed a uterus. Reply alexander says: June 1, 2016 at 20:56 Does anyone here have a problem with keeping the government away from both the gun and the abortion issues? How about limiting the government to ONLY those areas that are permitted to the government by the Constitution? Reply Cam says: June 1, 2016 at 21:33 I don’t believe that abortion is a right as it stands not. How is that if a couple has sex and said girl gets knocked up. She can abort the baby regardless of how the man feels, he cant force her to keep it but if she decides she wants it and he doesn’t he is forced to pay child support for 18 years. If they want to be able to get abortions then make it so that supporting the child is their responsability. How is it right that it takes two to tango but if want she wants can change the dance? If woman want that control over their body they should be responsible 100% for the child unless the man chooses to. Then any benifits from the government such as food stamps, housing, schip, etc. should have to be repaid by losing her tax refund or credits once the child is of majority OR she earns enough to pay them back. If they outlaw abortion then I am 100% for the man having to provide support as long as he is granted equal access and custody if he wants it. More financial support if he doesn’t want to take custody than if he does take custody. Reply Jay Hu says: June 1, 2016 at 22:15 So they are basically saying that they should not be bothered with petty time consuming processes to kill an unborn child in the womb, but we should be more bothered with petty time consuming processes to purchase a firearm so that if some day needed, we may defend a life? Reply A. C. says: June 1, 2016 at 22:36 This is a false moral equivalence. False in so many ways. Reply Stu in AZ says: June 2, 2016 at 02:07 I became my own individual with my own rights long before I became aware of those rights. So did anyone else reading this. Those who are fresh out of their mother’s womb, soon to depart the womb, or even fresh into the womb cannot speak for themselves. We have seen ultrasound evidence of them physically fighting for survival against the forceps of people who have taken the Hippocratic oath. We shouldn’t dismiss them just because they have no voice on the matter. Reply Ironhorse says: June 2, 2016 at 04:08 This website has gone completely to shit. Reply PeterK says: June 2, 2016 at 06:53 I actually feel stupider for having watched that. Blargh. Reply Diego Whitworth says: June 2, 2016 at 11:24 OK – 6 states a minor can get an abortion without parental notification or consent, 10 states all one has to do is tell (not get consent, just tell) one parent, another 3 one has to tell both. Find me 19 states where a minor can buy a firearm. Reply David says: June 2, 2016 at 13:01 BS false equivalency, not to mention the completely inapplicable stuff like ultrasounds. Though if they want to advocate for gov’t funding of guns, ammo, and training, I’d be all for that! Reply PeterW says: June 2, 2016 at 13:42 You can own thousands of guns without killing anyone. You cannot have even a single abortion without killing someone. Reply ChiGurh says: June 2, 2016 at 16:09 Have any of you guys heard of the 9th amendment???? Reply tsbhoa.p.jr says: June 2, 2016 at 20:56 shameful. these comparisons come up too frequently here without being coaxed. we need a name for the meme like the one where a commenter resorts to hitler. godwin’s law. roe’s law. Reply Max says: June 4, 2016 at 10:27 “How Tyranny Came to America” By Joseph Sobran http://sobran.com/articles/tyranny.shtml “Take abortion. Set aside your own views and feelings about it. Is it really possible that, as the Supreme Court in effect said, all the abortion laws of all 50 states — no matter how restrictive, no matter how permissive — had always been unconstitutional? Not only that, but no previous Court, no justice on any Court in all our history — not Marshall, not Story, not Taney, not Holmes, not Hughes, not Frankfurter, not even Warren — had ever been recorded as doubting the constitutionality of those laws. Everyone had always taken it for granted that the states had every right to enact them. Are we supposed to believe, in all seriousness, that the Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade was a response to the text of the Constitution, the discernment of a meaning that had eluded all its predecessors, rather than an enactment of the current liberal agenda? Come now.” Reply Alexander says: June 4, 2016 at 10:35 Regardless of whether one is for or against it, would the same logic apply to slavery? Reply Max says: June 4, 2016 at 11:25 There was never a time in all of human history when the humanity of a group of human beings was denied or questioned or debated, be it, slaves in the Antebellum South, the Jews by Nazi Germany, the Chinese by the Japanese during WWII, and so on, where eventually that society finally came to the belief of the full humanity of that group. Reply Jack Lane says: June 23, 2016 at 20:26 The truth is both issues are political matters when they should be a rights issue. There are 85,000 non fatal gun crimes in US each year. There are 21000 suicides and about 36 gun deaths outside of suicide per day (12,000 per year. Question are we willing to restrict, regulate control second amendment rights to reduce the number of deaths? There are 600,000 plus abortions performed in the United States each year. Are we willing to reduce, regulate or restrict 14th amendment rights to reduce the number of abortions? The last two mass murders in the United States have been committed by individuals with a middle east background. Are we willing to infringe upon rights of privacy to reduce potential that these crimes will be committed? I believe most Americans agree that we’d like to see more restrictions or regulations placed on guns. I believe that most Americans would like to see the need and number of abortions reduced. I believe that most Americans believe that Americans would accept some limits on their privacy if it would mean these horrendous events could be reduced or eliminated. The founding fathers could not envision the type of weaponry available today. In a similar context, contraception has improved considerably in the past 20 years allowing women the right to choose without say having an abortion after the first trimester as a method of birth control. But these three issues all affect a citizens right in some manner , shape or form. Do we accept some kind of restrictions or regulations of our basic rights? if so, we should be able to make compromises to reduce the number of gun deaths, abortions and terrorist events, I’m afraid these issues are viewed more as political issues. restrict or regulate someone elses rights but not mine. Reply Write a Comment Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email.