As if more proof were needed...

Recent articles by Dave Kopel and others have brought home the pertinence of my two recent posts on the right to keep and bear arms and Africa. To wit:

All the signs are there: Zimbabwe has started down the same road as Rwanda and Sudan.

What can we do? Not much. What can they do? Even less. Why?

The fact is that in Africa, in the last 15 years, all those who have died and who are going to die share one thing - one circumstance: they have no means of effective self-defense against their own governments.

If we could arm the people of Zimbabwe, they'd have a chance. Regrettably, Mr. Mugabe's efforts to disarm the populace have been quite effective.

Rwanda, Sudan, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, etc., etc.

And right on cue, in the wake of these tragedies comes the farce:

The U.N. continues to "inform" us that arming the populace of "name of African country here" will only serve to "destabilize" the region.

Perhaps someone from the U.N. would be kind enough to ask the people affected if they'd rather be "destabilized"...or dead.

So, my proof holds true: The right to self-defense IS the right to life. So, if one does not have the right to self-defense, one does not meaningfully have any right to life.