NO RIGHT TO RAINWATER

Government has gone way over the line.

When we apply our labor to a resource the resource becomes our property, unless it is already owned by someone else. This was the idea behind the requirement to work a claim after filing on it in the old West.

Since I don't see how the government can make a claim for ownership of the rain, it seems clear to me that it is free for the taking and that if someone applies their labor to capture it then it should belong to them.

The official in the video makes the argument that if someone captures the rain upstream then it cannot be used by someone else downstream. Why does the person downstream have more right to the resource than the person upstream? It is this sort of government distortion of natural law that leads to a lack of respect for the law in general.

Obviously, a person can't monopolize the resource in a way that harms others. In other words, I have no problem with the idea that the person downstream has a right to enough water to live. I'd guess that this is what the laws that are being enforced were written to control. But to extend this common sense application of the law to this totally intrusive level is but another example of massive government overreach.

If we have no right to use the rain then I would suppose our right to use the air is conditional, also. And what about the ground or the wind? Do we have any right to control our lives at all anymore or have we become completely dependent on the approval of some faceless bureaucrat for approval of our actions?

Can we grow our own food or hunt or own meat? If I grow a garden does someone else have a claim on the vegetables I've labored over, just as the person downstream has a right to the water someone else collects?

Welcome to our brave new world which is beginning, with every passing day, to more and more resemble the ugly old world of kings and serfs. The only freedoms we are going to have left are those the government allows us.