Comment: So how does anyone secure their inalienable rights?

(See in situ)


So how does anyone secure their inalienable rights?

In the face of someone who commits violence upon you, steals or damages your property, infringes upon your liberty, how do you correct that situation?

If force is being used upon you, what are you to do if not use force in response and in kind, to end the abuse, damage, theft, et cetera?

THIS is the SOLITARY purpose of government recognized in our FIRST organic law of the United States of America.

ANY other purpose or function of government - the use of force - is wholly unjustified, regardless of any language in subsequent documents "granting this or that power."

You aren't going to secure rights without force. If you've figured out how, the world would love to hear the answer.

That leaves us with something called government.

The problem then, isn't government itself, but the gross ignorance of why it needs to be limited to ONE PURPOSE and ONE PURPOSE ONLY.

Outside of this one purpose, I refuse to and cannot argue for, "limited government" either, but I'd wager when most people are arguing for limited government, even if they don't say so right at first, this is what they really mean and would gladly accept.

In fact, we should seriously revisit the Constitution through the prism of our Founding Document - the Declaration of Independence. If we did, we'd clearly find room to repeal most of the powers delegated in Article I § 8 and we'd likely find that some hybrid of the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution would suit us better.