"If I build a bonfire at night and my neighbor has asthma, am I violating his "rights" to clean air? Common respect and courtesy would dictate I would care about my neighbor, and at the very least let him know I plan to have a bonfire. His health issue in NO way constitutes his having a superior right over me enjoying my land, nor does it obligate me to refrain from my activities simply by virtue of his having a health issue."

Right here! This is the fundamental point I have been poorly trying to make!

In Rex's example he isn't forced by law, or even obligated to put out his bonfire, but he considers his neighbor's condition beforehand. It's the mindset that says " Maybe I need to tell ***** what I'm planning, and feel him out a little?" Rex is still not required to postpone his fire, but he considered something other than just his own wants and desires, and made an effort to think about his neighbors.

In my opinion, this is the key. This is the reason for so many of our laws. Folks not stopping to think about others, but just doing what they want, under the umbrella of property rights. Is it legal to do so? Probably. Is it morally correct? Well, we all have to judge that for ourselves. And the difficulty in doing that, is where a lot of laws come into being.

Rex has every right to that bonfire, irregardless of his neighbor's condition....I want to be clear about that. But sometimes, I wonder if we would have all those laws if more people simply considered someone other than themselves.


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.