Tuesday, November 23, 2010

A Random Thought

I read the following comment to a certain article,

Well, flying is a privilege, not a right. Driving a car is a privilege, not a right. Living where you choose to is a privilege, not a right. Saying what you feel like saying… associating with whom you choose to associate… breathing… living.

I find that formula is always short for power grab.
and a thought just occurred to me:  People are often talking about how flying, driving, etc are privileges, and not rights...but where in the Constitution does it mention privileges?

I, for one, say that driving, flying, and other modes of transportation are rights, and they are affirmed--but not granted, because the Constitution doesn't grant rights, it only recognises them--by the following amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


  1. Possible, but kinda dubious.

    Certainly it can't be so that every desired activity is automatically a right protected by the Constitution (directly or via the 10th Amendment).

    How do we decide whether or not driving is a natural right or a privilege?

  2. Driving is a natural right, as is flying, because we have a natural right to walk, and to travel from place to place.

    On the other hand, driving on State-owned--or even privately owned--roads is a privilege, because the owners of those roads have the right to determine who can or cannot use that property. Similarly, the owner of the means to fly has the right to determine who can and cannot fly on his airplane; just as the owner of a car has the right to determine who can and cannot ride in the car.

    It's important to keep these distinctions is mind, because so many people are claiming that flying is a privilege, not a right, to justify horrible intrusions on our rights--intrusions that are poised to spread from the airport, and into our daily lives!