"extensions beyond inalienable. There is nothing 'inalienable' about a legal right that grants you authority over who can and can not fish in a particular area..."
But the point is these rights are not "extended" - they just ARE. They may, however, be limited or constrained so as to avoid conflict with the rights of others.
As for property rights in the sense of ownership of land and ability to limit the access of others too one's land, again, the presumption must be that if one "owns" something, one has control over its use. That control may, however, be subject to legal constraints - for example, zoning laws that say you may not build a big ugly, smelly factory on your land in the middle of a residential area. Absent such laws, one is presumed to have the right to build the factory, but we create the laws because we know, from experience, that there are external effects that infringe on the rights of others to the quiet, non-smelly enjoyment of their own property nearby.
Re the 9th amendment, yes, it does seem to mesh well with my position. ;-) |
