Doesn't mean you've ever taken note no matter what you think your seniority implies.
And you only addressed half my comment....see "history" for the broad topic. The simple fact is that there has never, in the history of this country, been an absolute right to property.
Familiarize yourself with why "is" and "ought" are two different things in this argument and then the term "non-sequitur."
LOL. I've probably posted to more property threads than you've seen. I agree that current government incursions into property rights are and have been excessive and should, for the most part, be rolled back. But I put the right to life of the individual and the defense thereof higher on the priority list than ANYBODY's "right to property". A law abiding citizen should be able to have the best means to defend themselves ANYWHERE except inside of a private home of someone who objects. I'm also against abortion and think it should be illegal.
"Familiarize yourself with why "is" and "ought" are two different things in this argument and then the term "non-sequitur."
Sorry, but I have no clue as to what point you think you're making. Looking back, I see word "ought" to have been used exactly zero times in our exchange. Perhaps you intended it to have been implied in some of your responses. You might try for clarity of writing instead of obfuscation.