There are other, fundamental (or natural), rights which you have which may or may not be protected by the state in which you live. For example, you have a fundamental right to protect your self using any means necessary. The state in which you live may protect that right, but exclude guns as a "necessary means". You have a fundamental right to earn a living. The state in which you live may protect that right, but exclude occupations such as prostitution, drug dealing, and selling beer.
If there is a "compelling state interest" in the legislation, then the state may override your fundamental right for the good of the community.
Yes, you have rights. But so do the rest of us.
As to your smoking example, I happen to agree. A private enterprise such as a hotel, bar, or restaurant, should be allowed to set their own rules as to who they will hire, for how much, and who they will serve (which includes smokers/non-smokers).
As you said, market forces should balance the field -- if not, the city could use their power of licensing to regulate the proportions.
As per the U.S. Constitution, people have certain unalienable rights which cannot be ceded or taken away. These would include life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and property ownership as examples.
There are other, fundamental (or natural), rights which you have which may or may not be protected by the state in which you live.
Bizarre theory that there are different 'types' of rights. All of our rights, enumerated or not, are protected. When the State fails to protect, the US Constitution applies.
For example, you have a fundamental right to protect your self using any means necessary.
Correct
The state in which you live may protect that right, but exclude guns as a "necessary means".
Incorrect. - You've contradicted yourself. You cannot defend yourself if you lack the 'means', the weapons to do so. The State has no delegated power to outright prohibit possession of those necessary means, those weapons.
-- We have only granted States the power to reasonably regulate such matters. Excluding guns as a "necessary means" of self protection is not reasonable.
You have a fundamental right to earn a living. The state in which you live may protect that right, but exclude occupations such as prostitution, drug dealing, and selling beer.
Unreasonable. -- Criminal acts are dealt with in Courts before juries.
If there is a "compelling state interest" in the legislation, then the state may override your fundamental right for the good of the community.
Good grief, the Communitarian line, blatantly advocated on a conservative board, by a man that just accused me of being a troll. Go figure.
Yes, you have rights. But so do the rest of us. As to your smoking example, I happen to agree. A private enterprise such as a hotel, bar, or restaurant, should be allowed to set their own rules as to who they will hire, for how much, and who they will serve (which includes smokers/non-smokers). As you said, market forces should balance the field -- if not, the city could use their power of licensing to regulate the proportions.
235 RP
Paulsen, you are unequaled in your ability to self-rationalize infringements upon our individual rights in order to advance "the good of the community".
Go back to DU to peddle your wares.
Before I address your other points, I'd like to know what the compelling interest would be in preventing me from selling beer? Pretend for a moment that I live in a community of 100 people, all of whom have been drinking my beer for years. In fact, all 100 of them sell their own beer as well.
As time progresses, a few of them decide to stop drinking and selling beer for one reason or another. As time progresses further, the non-drinkers become a majority on the town council, perhaps five of them.
Can you think of a compelling 'state' interest that would empower a majority on the town council to arbitrarily stop the sale of beer in my community?
As an aside, there is something about the use of that phrase that just doesn't rub well. I know what it is, as do all free men, but will let it pass for now.
That's like saying that all our rights are in force except on Sundays, Mondays, and Tuesdays. Heh.
Okay, let's take another example:
Pretend for a moment that we live in a town of 100 people out in the badlands of New Mexico, era 1830.
Everybody wears guns because of the abundance of transient gun runts, thieves, robbers, bullies, etc., passing through town. We have not had a really bad shoot out for years on end. That is because nobody wants to get shot back at and die an instant death. (Excuse the grammar.)
Guns are as common as boots. Noboby pays attention to them any more than they would pay attention to someone picking their nose.
Some parents even let their kids wear guns or tote rifles, becoming adept and responsible in their use, care and handling.
One day somebody got drunk drinking my beer and accidentally shot himself in the foot and wasn't able to plow his field that fall.
His wife, really, really pissed because they wouldn't have the money to buy that fancy piano she always wanted, decided that enough is enough, ran for sheriff, won, and promptly posted a sign at the city limits and all over town that totin' guns in the street and in the beer halls and casinos was no longer allowed. Check your guns at the door from now on.
Soon thereafter, a band of cattle rustlers, rusty, crusty, and armed to the teeth passed through town one sunny day and immediately noticed that nobody was armed.
Well, you can imagine what happened if you've read enough phony western books or have a rack of old time western movies stashed next to your VCR.
The townsfolk counted their dead, replaced the windows at the bank, and voted to outlaw guns completely. Yup. That would work. It was a compelling state interest to coral all those guns that kept killing people, don'tcha know.
The town population began to dwindle, the undertaker was getting richer, and the cemetery was full, but few there was who could draw any correlation between the mortality rate and the absence of guns. Well, one of the residents decided that the town was going crazy and decided to wear his guns anyway lest the town decided to outlaw boot-wearing and nose-picking at some point.
Of course, he was arrested and thrown in jail. The law, you know. Strangely enough, he was the only free man in town, though he was the only one in jail.