Immigration restrictions are a violation of our fundamental right to travel

Immigration restrictions are a violation of our fundamental right to travel.

And taxation is theft :^)

as a citizen I am co owner of this country. who gives the immigrants the right to violate the law and illegally enter my property?

we are all owner of earth. everything belongs to all of us :3

>as a citizen I am co owner of this country
*leans into microphone*
wrong

Fuck off mountain Jew

>mfw

kek

okay, then who else owns the country if not the citizens?

You are wrong in this.
Earth owns you not you own Earth.

>our fundamental right to travel

This is not a thing. You have begun your argument from a false premise.

assimilate or fuck off

nonsense. here a video on how to make love with your sex slave earth :3

Pls, remove your fucking fence and door.
They mess with my fundamental right to travel.

And step aside, you are obstructing my fundamental right to travel.

>I have a right to everything
>Everyone has to bend over backwards to provide for me
>But like fuck am I going to pay any taxes to provide for anyone else!!!!!

wrong pic

Pervert.
Earth is your Mother not sex slave, baby medpack.

Nobody owns the country. You only own your property. A country is a legal jurisdiction, not an ownable thing.

I own my body, it's my property, therefore can do with it what I please as long as I'm not infringing on anybody else's rights. One of the things I can do with it is move it around, therefore I have a right to travel.

Your right to travel doesn't give you permission to violate my property

>Everyone has to bend over backwards to provide for me
No, that would be a violation of their rights :^)

You do not have that right. For example you may not enter onto my property if I do not desire you to do so.

no way jose we have state corporatism

If he cannot travel where he wishes when he wishes to do so then he does not have a right to travel.

immigration is not a human right

>Immigration restrictions are a violation of our fundamental right to travel.
Anarchism is about a country/place.

You make your country (or land if you are changing from one anarchism type to another) become an anarchist, not the entire world.

>For example you may not enter onto my property if I do not desire you to do so.
hence the "as long as I'm not infringing on anybody else's rights"

As long as I'm not violating other people's rights, which includes trespassing on their property, I have the right to move my body wherever I see fit

a country is more than a legal jurisdiction. if that was not the case the terms would be equivalent and every legall jurisdiction would be a country

>human right
fuck off with this bullshit language that doesn't mean anything

Except you do not. You cannot wander about on highways, you may not go for a walk on airport runways, you cannot be out when a curfew is in effect, and many other examples.

You do not have this right.

Not if it's a kingdom, where the country is simply the property of the monarch, but if it's a republic then it's really not much more than a legal jurisdiction.

This thread is dangerously spooky

All examples of trespassing, except for the curfew which is unjust

>what is positive law

I dont care what some UN faggot or lawyer says

a democratic country is owned by its citizens

if noone owned a country who would have the right to decide anything about it?

bullshit is what it is

How is wandering about on the highway tresspassing?

>DON'T TREAD ON ON MEEEEEEEEEE-

UN doesn't have jurisdiction over its member countries, at least not in any meaningful way.

In a democratic republic, the people subject to the laws of the jurisdiction get to decide what those laws might be, but that doesn't give them an ownership in anything. The country isn't property, it cannot be owned.

The state owns the highway and can apply rules and restrictions to its property

>the people subject to the laws of the jurisdiction get to decide what those laws might be
everyone who enters the country is subject to the laws. so according to you tourists and illegal immigrants get to decide what those laws might be

this is clearly not the case, therefore you are wrong

Agree with the pic but immigration restrictions are wrong for other reasons having nothing to do with free trade, as explained throughout this thread.

You got me, there's definitely a line that should be drawn so that temporary visitors don't decide the laws, but that doesn't extend to illegal immigrants since my whole premise is that there should be no such thing as an illegal immigrant.

I guess a better way to say it is that SOME people subject to the laws of the jurisdiction get to decide what those laws might be. Either way, a citizen still doesn't own a share of the country since the country is not ownable property.

And the state also owns the borders. Why can they not apply rules and restrictions to that property as well?

Illegal immigration is a violation of our fundamental right as citizens to protect our nation.

Taxation is a willing contract - you are making your own personal choice to pay taxes and in return you are provided services by the state, including the military, which defend you from foreign invasion.

If you don't want to pay taxes, then move to another nation. Or commit crime and go to jail. Or just go live in the woods where no one will find you / tax you. Fucking easy you dumb cunt.

Citizens own the country - the government is the property of the citizens which is why they are accountable to us.

You don't have a right to enter another country unless that country has granted you a right to do so. If they haven't, fuck off.

>Illegal immigration is a violation of our fundamental right as citizens to protect our nation
How so?

>Taxation is a willing contract
It's not willing, I signed no contract and never asked for those services. If I'm minding my own business nobody has the right to come onto my property with a gun and demand that I pay them so they can give me things

>Citizens own the country
I must have misplaced my shares then. What part of the country do I own? Can I sell it? Ownership requires property to own, and the country itself is not property, it's laws. You cannot own laws.

>You don't have a right to enter another country unless that country has granted you a right to do so
I have the right to go anywhere I please as long as I'm not violating anybody else's property, and since a country is not property any restriction of my free travel is a violation of that right.

thanks but I will stick with "citizens own their country"

>i have the right to go anywhere i please as long as i'm not violating anybody else's property

You already agreed that it was wrong to tresspass on government owned roads.

The government also owns their borders. You cannot freely pass through them since that is tresspassing.

>The government also owns their borders
Roads are property, borders are not. They're an aspect of property, but since the country is not property it does not have borders in that sense. Not borders that can be trespassed on.

It has legal boundaries of course, but that's not the same thing as a property line.

If you agree that they own the land occupied by the roads and decide who may use it, then they can also own the land that the border occupies and decide who uses that.

fuck off lolbertarian

>How so?
You agree that people have a right to protect themselves don't you? Then why do people not have the right to stop others from coming into their land?

The people in a country have a right to do whatever they damn well please and they can let in / not let in whoever the fuck they like, for whatever reason they like

Such is the power of democracy. If the people want immigration restrictions then immigration restrictions are what they shall have, and if you don't like it, tough tits

>It's not willing, I signed no contract and never asked for those services
Tacitly by remaining in the country, you do. If you think you could get a better deal in another country then go and live there you fucking idiot.

>If I'm minding my own business nobody has the right to come onto my property with a gun and demand that I pay them so they can give me things
Yes they do, might makes right. Fuck off.

>I have the right to go anywhere I please
No you don't, fuck off, or we will fucking make you.

>any restriction of my free travel is a violation of that right.
CRY ABOUT IT MORE FAGGOT, FUCK OFF, WE'RE FULL

Sure, if the state owns the land that the border occupies they can dictate who travels through it. But that's not what's going on when the government writes immigration law.

If two ranchers own their ranches on the border, one on the US side and one on the Mexico side, they should only need each other's permission to move back and forth between the properties. Instead, they also need the permission of a third party government. A third party that's dictating what one can do with his property.

So if I have elected government that says you are not welcome on the property we as citizens collectively own - country.- then you just ... fuck off.

Your citizenship is the contract.
Revoke it and fuck off or elect govenment with no taxes policy.

Well then, good thing your current and previous governments have been spending millions of dollars to acquire the border land on which the wall is being built

Territory is property and government has jurisdictioon on it.
Citizens decide what government does. Outsiders have no voice and unlawful intrusion is an act of war.

what is this reeeee creature supposed to be anyway? I always assumed it was a houndeye since they have three legs and make an autistic screeching but the face looks wrong.

Letting mexicans outside of your ranch is prohibited. So let them all in. Also, if you are so big of a man then you do not need government protection too so do not be surprised when you are killed in your sleep for divide and conquer strategy promoting and undermining state.

Entrance and Immagration to the USA is not a right, it is a privilege.

Get over it

saged.

Might makes right may be a reality, but it's an unjust one. If we want our country to be a just country then we have to start by respecting and protecting people's rights.

I think you might be confusing "right" with "luxury" or perhaps "permission".