More about your rights.


Understanding the Fundamental Nature of RIGHTS!

There is much debate over what a right is and what our rights are. There is also confusion as to where our right come from exactly. The complexity, however, lies in the human nature to over complicate things, not in the source, authority, or nature of these essential elements of life.

What is a Right?

The Free Dictionary at http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/right defines a right as:

right

1) n. an entitlement to something, whether to concepts like justice and due process, or to ownership of property or some

interest in property, real or personal. These rights include various freedoms, protection against interference with enjoyment

of life and property, civil rights enjoyed by citizens such as voting and access to the courts, natural rights accepted by

civilized societies, human rights to protect people throughout the world from terror, torture, barbaric practices and deprivation

of civil rights and profit from their labor, and such American constitutional guarantees as the right to freedoms of speech,press,

religion, assembly and petition.

… and Black’s Law Dictionary 5th Ed. Defines it, in part as:

Right

A power, privilege, or immunity guaranteed under
a constitution, statutes or decisional laws, or claimed
as a result of long usage.
In a narrower signification, an interest or title in an
object of property; a just and legal claim to hold, use,
or enjoy it, or to convey or donate it, as he may
please.

I don’t necessarily disagree with either of these definitions but for the sake of this article I would like to offer my own definition and the explanation of how I arrive at it.

To put it plainly, a right is something we can do without asking anyone for permission and without having to worry about getting penalized for doing it (the exception being if it violates the rights of others – addressed below), something that nobody can ever legitimately tell us we cannot do. I cannot think of a more simple and concise way to say it. This, of course, begs the question “What are those things we can do without permission and not get into trouble?”. We will come back to this in a minute. First we need to establish exactly where rights come from.

The fact that you were Created bestows your Rights!

You do not have to believe in God to acknowledge that something created you. One of the biggest hurdles that “non-believers” must overcome is the use of the word CREATOR in regards to our rights. Let me assure you that there is no need for anyone to believe anything special to acknowledge that, indeed, something did create us. You may personally consider that a god, or your parents, or anything you wish so long as you just acknowledge the fact that we were all created.

Why is this important? Well, if you were never created then you were not created equal to all other men or created with unalienable rights. I won’t go too far into this philosophy but suffice it to say, technically speaking, EVEN IF you do not believe that you were created, never admit it in court. As soon as you do, you open yourself up to being at the absolute mercy of the court with no lawful recourse or restrictions upon what they can legally, and lawfully, do to you. To put it bluntly, if you were not created you do not exist in the eyes of the law and thus nothing in law, whatsoever, will protect you from anything.

The Origin of Rights

All rights are granted, and all laws are written, exclusively by creators and conquerors. A lot of people try and dispute this at face value when I say or write this statement. It has historically been the subject for much controversy, though always known by other things.

To fully understand this concept one must realize that rights and laws must be enforceable. Conceptually speaking this is confined to a creator with the antithesis power to destroy it’s own creation and conquerors who have shown superior force in regards to regulating what you do (This can be recognized in something as simple as a contract, not necessarily an all out violent war. Do not conflate the meaning of conquer in this context).

To explain this another way; Suppose I were to grant you rights and write laws for you to follow. Can I do that? Firstly, I would have to be able to protect the rights I grant you (otherwise known as privileges because you are not my creation). The current arrangement with our creator is that we were given the ability to defend ourselves (mentally, physically, and emotionally from threats against us and the exercising of said rights) AND the right to do it. I can say whatever I want but it would not actually be me granting those to you unless… Secondly, I would have to be able to control you somehow. Be it the expected physical violence or a much more subtle media campaign I would have to be able to enforce the laws I have made. In short, “No!”, I cannot do that, not lawfully or within my current political authority (I’m nothing but a people) anyway. One might say that government has done that to The People but that is beyond the scope of this article.

The Difference Between a Right and a Privilege

As I’ve mentioned, only creators and conquerors can grant rights. This is only contextually true. Rights granted by anything other than a creator are simply privileges. This is where distinctions between Natural Rights, Common Law Rights, Civil Rights, Etc… become arguments but none of it is really necessary. The plain and simple truth is only rights bestowed by a creator are rights. Everything else is just an access level to privileges granted by whomever is in control of you. In other words, things some other (wo)man/men allow you to do. Many may call these rights but it is just a matter of semantic labels and not substantive meaning, thus the mention of human nature at the beginning of this article and our compulsion to over complicate, if not flat out justify things.

Much of the confusion lies with how rights are protected. Inevitably our only real security against a rights infringement is self defense. That extreme notion aside though, conquerors are responsible for protecting the rights they grant, though there is no guarantee that they will actually do it. Some people favor this type of structured control system and put their faith in government to eventually do the right thing and administer justice. We The People… had a different idea. We decided that it was too risky and vulnerable to corruption (if history is an indicator of ANYTHING) to let another man decide what our rights and laws are. We decided to ESTABLISH our government to protect us from being conquered and defend our rights, the original one’s we were born with. This makes our government our creation. That is where our Constitution comes in. It is the rules… The Supreme Law that government must follow. As far as government is concerned (when they are not acting in a criminal capacity against us), we are the creators, granter of their rights and writers of their laws, but never the other way around. It could never be the other way around. We would have to be conquered. Some might say through Birth Certificates and Social Security Numbers that we already have been but that is a topic for another article.

(On a side note, this is one of the things that creates “American Exceptionalism”. All other governments are conquerors of their people and creators of their societies. The people of these United States are self governing with self determination and WE created government. All of the government written laws are for our creations, not us!)

What are my RIGHTS?

In short, in the eyes of the actual law (law authored by the creator) you have the right to do pretty much anything you wish as long as you do not do it to someone else’s property without their expressed permission (we are our own property in the eyes of the law) or, in other words, enter a contract.

Law and rights are like two peas in the same pod. While the exact nature, intent, and definition of law are another topic beyond the scope of this article, rights cannot be legitimately mentioned without including at least the notion of law in the discussion.

It can be said that all law is broken down into Property and Contract. We are our own property in the eyes of the law and we have the right to do what we wish with our property as long as we don’t injure someone else’s property while doing it. This is where Law, The Courts, and Peace Officers are supposed to come in. If someone injures our property, we are supposed to be able to make a claim and try to sue for damages, where there is remedy, the one who injured our property. Now, of course there is much more to it than this but in a nutshell, this is how it is SUPPOSED to be.

Along these lines, we return to rights. What it boils down to is; We have the right to live. We have the right to own property. We have the right to negotiate with others and do as we wish using that property. With these basic concepts, Life, Liberty, and Happiness, all of our rights are derived.

Limits to Rights

Are there limits to our rights? If you go around asking random strangers this question you will most likely get more different answers than you could possibly imagine. The right answer though is a conditional “Yes.”. What do I mean by conditional? Our rights have one, and only one, single lawful limitation… other people’s rights. Other than that we were given the facilities to do pretty much anything we wish which is indicative of having the rights to do pretty much anything we wish.

What about yelling “Fire!” in a theater? Is that a right? Well, yes it is. There are many arguments against what I say, that there are indeed limits to rights. One of the most popular arguments is someone heatedly asserting to you “You can’t legally yell ‘fire’ in a theater! That’s not a Right!”. The thing is, you can and it is. You can yell anything you wish in a theater, or anywhere else for that matter, but if someone sustains an injury to their property because of something you have done, you are to be held accountable. If you yelling ‘fire’ causes a panic that gets someone hurt it is your fault and the injured party has the right to seek damages. You have the right but it only extends to the boundaries of other’s rights. If something we do causes injury, it is not the exercising of a right that is wrong, but the injuring of someone else because you exercised your right in an inconsiderate, malicious, or otherwise incompetent manner.

It must also be considered that, while you aren’t, the theater is the creation and property of someone and that gives them the authority to pass rules, in other words laws, to govern the use thereof. By you using their property you agree to abide by those rules under penalty of having the privilege of using the theater revoked (contract).

“How about killing people? You don’t have the right to go around killing people!”. Again, yes you do… IF it is in defense of your, or someone else’s property or rights. Even the government doesn’t deny this when confronted with it publicly and factually.

The Current State of Things

There are many people that will argue against everything I have said here. Most of the time I would be citing many different sources to uphold and prove what I claim but that isn’t really applicable here. What I am describing is our Unalienable Rights. These have existed since the dawn of man and predates even the harnessing of fire. These rights do not depend on what some equally created man thinks or writes down and calls law. They depend upon us and our vigilance to the security of these rights, our convictions to justice for all regarding these rights, and our insatiable need for freedom that comes from these rights.

However, with that said, if someone does, indeed, need confirmation from the courts:

“If persons can be restrained of their liberty. and assaulted and imprisoned, under such circumstances. without complaint or warrant, then there is no limit to the power of a police officer. ••• Any law which would place the keeping and safe conduct of another in the hands of even a conservator of the peace, unless for some breach of the peace committed in his presence, or upon suspicion of felony, would be most oppressive and unjust, and destroy all the rights which our constitution guaranties. These are ~ which existed long before our constitution, and we have taken just pride in their maintenance, making them a part of the fundamental law of the land.” Pinkerton ‘V. Verberg, 78 Mich. 573.44 N.W. 579. 582-83 (1889); Larson v. Feeney. 196 Mich. I. 162 N.W. 275. 276-77 (1917). – Emphasis added.

As admitted in this case, we simply adopted the laws and rights of the creator. We didn’t make this stuff up ourselves. We knew we couldn’t, and to try would be folly. We knew the only thing we could successfully create laws for was our creation of government and other inventions of man. All one has to do is observe any other nation and the repetitive tries and failures at every turn with other forms of government that demand service of the people instead of providing a service for the people to see the proof of this. And please do not confuse a nation’s stability for security or a people’s multiple choice for liberty. Prisons would be a good example of this. For the most part they are very stable and you can usually find people laughing and goofing off but they are only really as safe as they are kept by the jailers and their liberty is pretty much refined to the basic choice of whether to eat or not.

In other nations you simply do not have any rights recognized by the government, only privileges that they allow you on a conditional basis that you follow their laws (statutes, rules, regulations, policies, codes, etc…), and then there is no guarantee that they will actually do what they are supposed to in the event someone violates the privileges they allow. This form of stability can sustain a society indefinitely but at the cost of our humanity and the liberty, dare I say the RIGHT, to be who we want and not who someone else tells us we must be.

For whatever reason, be it power or religion or security, there always has been, and always will be, an excuse from someone who wants to control you by oppressing your rights. If you do not have this fundamental understanding of exactly what your rights are you are at the mercy of tyranny from a variety of flavors. Most commonly found in our society today is “statutory law” where they try and convince us that we are all too stupid and evil to regulate ourselves so we must be regulated by government… for our benefit and safety. The general public believes these things and accepts these statutes as legitimate law for human people, and not just for our creations (government, corporations, etc…) but sadly they are all very misinformed. The facts are; Man cannot grant other men rights. Restriction and regulation always lead to corruption and abuse unless both parties are given full disclosure and fully agree to terms. And if you think about it, if it were all for our benefit and safety, wouldn’t we have benefited and been more safe by now? In reality it is quite the opposite. We have never been more restricted and less safe in regards to our government.

It is the governments charged responsibility to uphold the law and protect our rights but it is, and always has been, our responsibility to make sure they do their job correctly. Established government is simply an unreliable convenience and in no way should be counted as a viable defense in any given situation when regarding our immediate individual liberties. They are simply a hired security for us that has gotten so relaxed and fat with the authority we gave them that they are now starting to challenge that authority and hold us to the rules we make for them. This is unacceptable.

The Future and What can be Done

I will be posting more articles that further the concepts outlined here and will expand upon other aspects of our rights, the law charged with defending them, and our lawful recourse in the face of impending doom at the hands of tyrants. In most cases, for fear of injury and death, it is wise to “play their game” and go through the motions of participating with their statutes, policies, and unlawful orders/practices and fight these battles in court the best you can, but never forget, just because you aren’t using your rights to defend yourself against an unlawful system doesn’t mean it isn’t still there at your disposal. No man created equal has authority over any other man unless that man has committed a crime first by violating the rights of another. Whether or not you allow it to happen is up to you. Rest assured though, as long as we let them get away with it they will continue and keep getting away with it.

Jason Parsons