Sorry Tempe.
But, I think you, Ringo and CS are trying so hard to discredit the 'innate' or 'inherent' rights argument, that, IMO, evidence is sounding forced or ridiculous. Look where the topic has gone to:
You wrote several strained paragraphs of "cliffs are dangerous . . . or not"
Ringo is writing 'compelling' rebuttals such as "When it's lawful it's lawful and when it's unlawful it's unlawful."
CS is writing on-and-on about a weed-free garden.