Government is charged with the responsibility of defending rights. Sometimes governments try to define guidelines under which they will defend rights. They may define conditions (under which people agree to the definition of the description of property) for purposes of defending property rights.
Which is not granting rights.
People are free to defend their rights in lieu of government living up to their responsibility to defend them. Or more often, when government itself becomes the usurper of those rights. The second amendment (among other things) addressed this inevitable failure by government.
Your perception of rights is fundamentally incorrect. From that mistake flows all of your other mistakes. And that explains why you are in favor of the ochlocracy that you perceive will allow you to violate the rights of others to further your own personal goals.
Agreed.
There are others.
Agreed.
None of them are granted by people or groups of people. (government)
Wrong. I have numerous rights established by people and groups of people. At my church I have the right to receive communion and vote at church meetings. At my work I have the right to certify financial statemetnts, represent taxpayers before the IRS, and I have the right to be your investment representative. In my town, I have the right to vote for/against taxes and vote for representatives. All of the aforementioned rights are granted to me by various groups.
Government is charged with the responsibility of defending rights.
Ok,
Sometimes governments try to define guidelines under which they will defend rights.
OK, so far.
They may define conditions (under which people agree to the definition of the description of property) for purposes of defending property rights.
Ok.
Which is not granting rights.
Ok, but they certainly have created property and defined both your rights and obligations for that property and retain the right to change those rights and obligations. Im not comfortable using the word "grant" either. But lets use other examples. Remember land grants from history class ? And a more up to date example, the government sale of frequencies for radio and cell phones ? Please explain how these get granted with being granted ?
People are free to defend their rights in lieu of government living up to their responsibility to defend them.
Of course.
Or more often, when government itself becomes the usurper of those rights.
This war was fought. It was called the civil war. We lost even when we had the full backing of the state we resided in. We do have the right and the obligation to be prepared to fight it again but I doubt you will find many nonsmokers or even smokers for that matter willing to take up arms.
The second amendment (among other things) addressed this inevitable failure by government.
So did the declaration of independence. The problem is without a state its next to impossible to maintain any rights to property.
Your perception of rights is fundamentally incorrect.
You have yet to explain to me how your perception can explain reality. Your perception ignores, Corporations, it ignores land grants, it ignores copyrights, it ignores deeds and titles, it ignores trusts. In short, yours ignores virtually the entire spectrum of property ownership in order for it to work.
From that mistake flows all of your other mistakes.
Ok.
And that explains why you are in favor of the ochlocracy that you perceive will allow you to violate the rights of others to further your own personal goals.
Big jump here. I disagree that the restaurant owner should be forced to change his smoking policies. So, its not my personal desire being accomplished even though I like the result.