This is about as dense as a brick of plutonium and even more dangerous. I'm trying. It gets better. Read parts 1-3 first.
In my mind, all rights are completely equal. None is greater than the other.
So you have the right to own a TV, but where do you get the TV from?
Suppose no one will sell or give you a TV.
Do you have the right to force them to provide you with a TV?
Say no. Then where do you get a TV if no one will sell or give you one? (This assumes you will not build a TV for yourself.)
If owning a TV is a right, then you have the right to try to get one, certainly. But you can't harm someone to get one. Conundrum encountered! I do not have a solution, except to say a TV is not necessary for your continued existence.
If you don't get a TV, tough.
Say yes, you can force someone to provide you with a TV.
Where did you get the right to force someone to provide you with a TV?
Is the right to own a TV equal to the right to force someone to provide a TV?
You have the right to own a TV.
Who is responsible for supplying your TV?
If you say government is responsible for getting a TV for you, where will government get it? Government does not create anything. It takes, manages and distributes.
To get your TV, government has to take my TV. There is no other way for government to get a TV. None. Government can hire someone to build you a TV. Government must get the money from me. This prevents ME from having enough money to buy a TV.
This is harm to me. This violates my right to not be harmed.
Maybe getting a TV is not a right. Maybe getting a TV is privilege. A privilege is not a right.