Me. Myself & i

I ended because my breakfast was here...
I just wanna mention something else

I think many of the human rights supporters will be jumping when they see this post (not for joy definitely)
Anyway, from my previous entry, it is easy to infer that I think human rights can be consented away. Meaning, if they people choose to do something wrong, they have no human rights. That is not what i am proposing.
My idea of Human rights is based upon people making choices (as wrong as i may be), and i will go as far as saying the state policies should not be subjected to Human rights (which is very wrong for many of you out there.) Let my try to explain myself first:

My idea of Human rights is based upon the choices people make, you have the right to make choices in what you want to do, how to do it, legally or illegally. The consequences that comes with it is because of the choices they make. They will be punished or awarded based on those choices, the right of choice. The consequences are sought of foreseeable and ought not be subsumed under 'right', if need be, perhaps 'right to be punished', because each one is rational individual (an assumption...)
The state ought not to be subjected to my idea of human rights because the choice is by individuals. The consequences sanction by the state is decided after weighing the rights of different categories of people. Some balance ought to be struck definitely, but more often than not, other factors such as the market interest, relationships with other countries etc will come into play. The state has also to be stern about their principles on certain things.

Anyway, at the end of the day, a lot of laws are not those that we break on a habitual basis. If we eat, work, shit, sleep as normal human beings. Will we go around killing people? Will we traffic drugs? Will we do weird things like pointing third finger at ur neighbour?