Rights cannot be lost, alienated, or accumulated.  The things to which we have rights (such as property) can be lost or accumulated, but the rights themselves are inalienable.

This makes clear that the molestation or usurpation of an individual's property interest in his own life is always wrong.  It is implicitly immoral.

The fact that a right cannot be alienated is implicit in the idea of equal rights.

If rights could ever be lost, or if some people could obtain additional rights over or at the expense of others, it would mean that equality of rights is impossible.  Some would have more than others, and some would have none.  This would be an inequality of rights.

There are those individuals who maintain that this is indeed the case - that the rich and powerful somehow have more rights than other people, or that members of this or that sub-category of people have more or fewer rights than members of other groups.

Such people have a profound mis-understanding of the moral concept of rights.

There are many people who claim to believe in the moral concept that rights are both equal and inalienable, but who make exceptions.

They will argue that if a man performs an immoral act (or perhaps simply an illegal one), that such a man forfeits his rights.

This, such people will further content, means that the victim of the immoral (or illegal) act, now has greater rights over the person who committed the act.

If this were in fact the case, then rights are not a result of the nature of man, but are only the result of man's conduct.

This thinking reverts us to the notion that monarchs or government have all the rights, and individuals only have those rights that they are permitted to keep by virtue of their obedience to government (those in power).