Can you give an example of a lawsuit in which two parties' "rights" come "into conflict".
Let's say you claim the 'right' to ban arms in your company parking lot. As an employee forced to park in your lot, I claim the right to have a gun in my car trunk. --
"Let's say"? You mean, for the sake of argument, let's just pretend that my property is my property? Um, OK, let's just pretend...
You asked izzy.. Did you 'forget'? --- Or is it possible you need 'rest' again? [about this time last night you made the same weird mistakes]
As an employee forced to park in your lot...
Again with "forced". Frankly, pal, you aren't forced to do nothin'. You aren't forced to work for me, for that matter, if you find my rules so intolerable.
We've went over this before. --
--- This BS started at a paper mill in the sticks in Oklahoma izzy. You either got to work by driving, parked in the company lot [sans gun] or didn't work; -- but of course, a wise guy brady type like you could care less about our RKBA's.
You don't have a right to keep and bear arms into my house.
How inane izzy. -- We are discussing the right to carry arms in your trunk, while at work.
-- We are discussing the right to carry arms in your trunk, while at work onto someone else's private property. I fixed that for you. Now think about it. Slowly. Carefully. You can do it.
No need to think about your idiocy izzy; -- you demonstrate it with every post.
Now why don't you be a good boy and get lost? I think I hear "yo' momma" calling.
I invoke Israel's law and declare you the loser. However, I will leave you with one thought you'll apparently find mind-blowing: that parking lot is your boss's land. It isn't yours. He's in charge of it. You aren't. Very simple, really.