HOO-freakin'-RAY! The meaning of our rights...

21 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
Hi All,

Let's play a little game. What follows is purely theoretical.

So, some things are our "rights". We have the "right" to them.

But doesn't that imply we have the "right" NOT to avail ourselves of them?

For example, let's say you are told "you have the RIGHT to remain silent". Fair enough, that means you don't have to talk, BUT it also means you can choose TO talk if you want.

Let's say there is another "right". However, if you choose to not take advantage of this "right" you can be fined up to $1899!!!

But wait, just don't pay the fine, right?

Wrong.

Because if you don't pay the $1899 fine for NOT exercising this particular "right", you can go TO JAIL for 365 days, or pay a $24,999 FINE.

Here's the question: Does that sound like a right to you?

(Keeping in mind this is theoretical)

All the best,
Michael
  • Profile picture of the author Killer Joe
    I'll bite...what kind of trouble have you gotten yourself into this time.

    KJ
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222261].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
      Originally Posted by Killer Joe View Post

      I'll bite...what kind of trouble have you gotten yourself into this time.

      KJ
      LOL

      No, this is all theoretical.

      For the sake of this "situation", let's say it is something that could imapct a lot of people if they choose not to follow this "right".

      I just want it to be perfectly clear that this is not a political discussion. Just theory.

      Would you consider what I describe in the above post to be an actual right?

      All the best,
      Michael
      Signature

      "Ich bin en fuego!"
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222269].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
        So, for the sake of argument, if there's a country (and I can think of at least one) where you had to exercise your "right" to vote in a general election, under penalty of fine, you wouldn't call that a right?


        Frank
        Signature


        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222272].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
        It's not a right if you get fined for not taking advantage of it. It's a law

        A right is something that has no negative implications if you DON'T choose
        to avail yourself of it.

        Okay, I understand the right to remain silent thing but you'd have to be
        a freaking idiot to open up your fool mouth if you're arrested.

        Other than that, I can't see any right that if you didn't take advantage of
        it, it could hurt you seriously because if that's the case, it's either not a
        right (a law) or you're an idiot not to do it.

        And if it's a right whereby exercising it can hurt you in another way, then
        you're talking about a no win situation, in which case, you take the lesser
        of the two evils. If availing yourself of the right is the lesser of two evils
        then by all means do it. If paying the fine is the lesser of the two evils,
        then pay the fight.

        However, if I were ever confronted with such a choice (I can't even
        imagine it) and it not only applied to me but everybody else in my part
        of the world, I'd have no doubt that there would be anarchy and a
        revolution.

        But again, what you're describing sounds more like a law than a right.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222282].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Killer Joe
    Originally Posted by Michael Oksa View Post

    Here's the question: Does that sound like a right to you?

    This sounds like a conversation down at the IRS.

    I need more info. Can I buy a vowel?

    KJ
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222283].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    No that's not a right. Rights involve choice and "forced" is not a factor in a right.

    Some people will argue that it is your "right" to breath - but that is not really a right
    either. You don't have a choice. You can hold your breath until you pass out, but
    you will begin breathing again as soon as you lose consciousness. So breathing is
    not a right, it is a necessity.

    If you are under force to exercise a "right" it is not a right it is a demand.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222289].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
    You would think it wouldn't be a right. But let's say someone who has an input into it keeps calling it a "right".

    It doesn't sound like a right to me either. Hypothetically speaking.

    Do you really think if anything like that ever happened people would revolt? Or, if they did revolt, do you just think they would be called names to distract from the real situation? Again, just an imaginary scenario.

    All the best,
    Michael
    Signature

    "Ich bin en fuego!"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222291].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
      Originally Posted by Michael Oksa View Post

      You would think it wouldn't be a right. But let's say someone who has an input into it keeps calling it a "right".
      Then that someone comes from some village that's missing its idiot.

      It doesn't sound like a right to me either. Hypothetically speaking.
      I have the right to the pursuit of happiness, but if I can't afford the things that make me happy, should I be fined for not buying them? If I can't afford the things that make me happy, how can I afford the fine for not buying them? And, if I can't afford the fine, and get hit with a bigger fine that's 16x greater than the original fine, how can I be expected to pay that fine? And, then I will be thrown in jail for not paying the fines for not purchasing the things that I couldn't afford? That wouldn't make me happy.

      Do you really think if anything like that ever happened people would revolt? Or, if they did revolt, do you just think they would be called names to distract from the real situation? Again, just an imaginary scenario.
      Probably, but then what happens is that if others keep repeating a lie often enough, it will seem to be the truth. And then you're stuck having rights forced upon you that aren't really rights at all.
      Signature

      Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

      Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222314].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        Then that someone comes from some village that's missing its idiot.
        Yeah. What Dan said.

        Rights vs requirements. Attempts to confuse and conflate the two are as old as political spin.


        Paul
        Signature
        .
        Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222392].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
          Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

          Yeah. What Dan said.

          Rights vs requirements. Attempts to confuse and conflate the two are as old as political spin.


          Paul
          Paul... there's no spin in politics!

          (hee hee hee)
          Signature

          Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222399].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Patrician
    Sounds like being RAILROADED.

    (closer to a law than a right)

    ... a very bad law.

    I PROTEST!

    let me off at the next station.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222295].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
    However, it may seem like beineg railroaded by
    everyone with some common sense. But, really, can
    anyone know for sure? Though it sounds to some
    like a right. I don't think it is. Remember, it's fiction...
    theory. Not to sound like a broken record, but it
    hasn't happened. Interesting to talk about though.

    Choosing is an important ingredient in the rights of
    americans. But to say things like there could be
    revolution, well if that's what such a scenario would
    ensure, then I must say it would be kind of scary.

    All the best,
    Michael
    Signature

    "Ich bin en fuego!"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222300].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
    You mean like, the "right" to be insured?

    And the proposed "punishment" if you choose not to exercise that right?

    Signature

    Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222303].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
      Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio View Post

      You mean like, the "right" to be insured?

      And the proposed "punishment" if you choose not to exercise that right?

      I have no idea what you're talking about.

      ~M~
      Signature

      "Ich bin en fuego!"
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222308].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
        Originally Posted by Michael Oksa View Post

        I have no idea what you're talking about.

        ~M~
        Something I heard...

        That's for another thread.

        But to answer your question: No, it doesn't sound "right". But the way laws get written in this country, it's certainly feasible - and probably already happening.
        Signature

        Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222315].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
      Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio View Post

      You mean like, the "right" to be insured?

      And the proposed "punishment" if you choose not to exercise that right?

      In the case of auto insurance, it's not a right...it's law. At least in NJ.

      Now, homeowners insurance, that's a right...I think. That may even be a
      law for all I know.

      But let's say it's a right and the failure to exercise it means you COULD
      end up losing your home to some natural disaster and getting no
      compensation for it.

      Again, who in their right mind would not avail themselves of that right
      unless they couldn't afford it? In which case, if they can't, what the
      hell are they doing buying a home.

      I think we're splitting hairs here.

      When I think of rights, I think of:

      The right to vote
      The right to bear arms

      Etc.

      There are no negative consequences or penalties for directly not taking
      advantage of those rights.

      Yes, if you don't vote, a lousy politician could end up in office.

      If you don't own a gun, you could end up getting killed by a burgler.

      But simply not exercising those rights doesn't automatically mean a
      penalty.

      That to me is a law, not a right.

      Again, we're splitting hairs here and it's giving me a headache.

      The day somebody gives me a "right" that I have to worry about not
      taking advantage of it, I'm moving to Australia.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222321].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
        Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post

        In the case of auto insurance, it's not a right...it's law. At least in NJ.
        Actually I was referring to this:

        Fines proposed for going without insurance - Health care reform- msnbc.com

        More or less, it states that in the health care reform bill it was proposed that those who did not get insured would be fined up to $3800 - on a bill written because everyone has the "right" to affordable health care.

        I just thought it was ironic...and I thought that's what Mike's post was about. Guess not?
        Signature

        Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222370].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
      In a democracy, most people would consider the ability to vote in an election as a "right". Yet in Australia, voting in a federal or state election is compulsory for all citizens, with a fine for non-compliance.

      They call it a "duty", rather than a right.



      Frank
      Signature


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222325].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
        Okay, let's get more specific here.

        Some guy says, "You have the right to come over to my house and eat
        dinner with me."

        I discover that this guy poisons his guests and they all die. So I exercise my
        right not to go eat there.

        But...if I don't exercise that right, he sends his good squad over to my house
        to collect a $5,000 fine. And this happens each month as he issues one
        invitation to the whole town each month.

        I'd be at the front door with a shotgun, without even thinking twice about
        it.

        Yes, absurd example, but the point is, if a right has a negative consequence
        for not exercising it, then it's not a right. It's a threat.

        And I don't take too kindly to threats.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222340].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author rondo
        Originally Posted by Frank Donovan View Post

        In a democracy, most people would consider the ability to vote in an election as a "right". Yet in Australia, voting in a federal or state election is compulsory for all citizens, with a fine for non-compliance.

        They call it a "duty", rather than a right.



        Frank
        That's true. I've been fined for not voting in a local election (I didn't even know it was on). If you don't pay the fine they cancel your drivers licence until you do. Gotta love democracy.

        Andrew
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222426].message }}

Trending Topics