They're Armed, Dangerous And Next Door

So if I find a young man willing to sell himself, sign the contract and take the money ... I can buy myself a slave?

Then sell him on the open market to the highest bidder?

An inalienable right is the kind of thing that exists beyond any government decision or personal choice.

The constitution simply recognises rights , it does not grant them.

The right to protect your self is given by God, or nature .. or what ever you find as the root of life itself.

If you ask me to leave my right to protect myself at the door , then I can agree not to exercise that right , but the right still goes with me.
If you try to punch me , I may chose to exercise the right to protect myself , even though I previously said I would relinquish that right.

Some rights can not be relinquished , simply not exercised.

Since man first picked up a stick, the act of self protection , has carried with it the utilization of tools.

Your correct that you can insist that on your private property no one can exercise the right to self protection ...
you can also proclaim that on your private property you can buy and sell people who would like to sell themselves in to slavery.

Neither is a legitimate request.
And should be unenforcible as a civil tort.

All rights exist before the state. A state may, with the consent (and often without the consent) of the governed, infringe on a right. This ability to infringe on a right or inability to infringe on a right is not a condition on an individual.

For example: You have the right to be secured in person, place and things as described in the IV amendment. The state cannot seize property without a warrant and just cause. This is not a restriction on a private citizen however.

If you are my roommate and I believe you are selling drugs, I can take evidence from your room and present it to the police and this evidence is admissible in a court of law, provided I am not acting as an agent of the state during my seizure. Look it up.

Another example: You have the right to free speech as detailed in the first amendment. But if you are my employee and you do a TV commercial for my competition I can fire (and fast). I did not infringe on your right to free speech. You still have it and can exercise it, just not as my employee.

Likewise, the restriction on the state to prevent it from infringing on your right to keep and bear arms does not restrict the individual. I can restrict your right to carry weapons on my private property. You now have a choice. You can either stay off my property and carry your weapon or abide by my rules. Either way, the state is not infringing on your rights, and the ultimate choice to disarm yourself is yours.

Slavery is another issue however. The restrictions imposed by the XIII amendment apply to the entire United States and it jurisdictions. You can choose to be a "slave" to someone else, but this is a voluntary condition that you can leave at anytime, since slavery is illegal in the United States. So can you sell yourself into slavery? No, because it would be an illegal contract. You could act as a slave if you desired, but your slavery would end when ever you wanted it to, or the slave owner is breaking the law. So do you have the right to act as a slave? You sure do. But again, this is your free choice.

This is not a difficult concept. If I own this property, I can restrict access to this property if you are not acting in accordance to my desires. I cannot direct your actions off my property, but on my property I can.

Thoughtful answers both, but lets see ...

if a person has the right to deny my self protection on his property, doesn't the collective body enjoy the same right , derived from the group?

In other words if there is a right to deny my ability to protect my self, then since the collective derives only those rights that the individual can posses and give, does that mean that communities , cities, counties, states can deprive me of the right to defend myself?

And if that is the case then we can kiss our guns good bye?

Communities only have rights that individuals have .

Individuals vest those rights in a government.
If individuals have the right to deny gun possession then the community can also, ... is that really the side of the coin you want to be on?

If individuals have the right to deny gun possession then the community can also,...

The individual cannot deny you or me gun possesion except on his private property. If you do not wish to give up the temporary possesion of your weapon, stay off his property. The choice is yours.

Still, the collective body would have this right and does in limited circumstances. You can not bring a weapon into a prison for example. However, the constitution is specifically written with the collective body or the state in mind. It is meant to protect the individual against the collective body, not the other way around.

Your right to carry a weapon does not infringe on my right to control my private property. Your rights extend until they infringe on my rights, and vice versa. I cannot infringe on your right beyond my private property.

Again, if you do not want to be disarmed, stay off his property. It is your choice!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.