Where you feel encroaching injustice, you have the option of disobedience, do you not? But that does not necessarily mean that your disobedience will be tolerated or accepted. There is no guarantee of that and that is why I tried to say that invoking natural rights can be completely ineffective. But it can also be effective, I can only know if I try it concretely. That is, I have an address to which I bring my concrete case. This can be a person, but also a court.

Neither the terms "life", nor "freedom", nor "property" are so clearly and universally defined that there would always be agreement on their definitions.
"Life" is something inexplicable, no one knows how and when it came into being and why. "Freedom" is such a difficult concept that countless people have tried definitions and concepts on it and always come up with different explanations, and "property" is a bottomless pit. None of these three terms can be totally grasped or is indisputable. Because these terms are contested, there is a lot of contention around them. Consider that the core of my comment.

It is like "time". I know what it is, but if you ask me, I don't know anymore. Means, I know that I live, I experience the passing of time (I age) and I can describe to you personal situations of freedom as well as lack of freedom.

If you don't want to argue, for example, the worst you will do is try to force something on other people, kill them or otherwise do violence to them. Or ignore, that is also a widespread means.

("There is no 'conflict'!" - Darth Vader to Luke Skywalker (Episode VI - Return of the Jedi Knights, Chapter 39) - the one who claims that there is no conflict will not see the opportunities that arise from discord and doubt with each other.

So that person will not feel any obligation towards this "natural right", as you put it. And indeed, this is a reality that we experience whenever there is war or crises arise or something is perceived as being in crisis. Acceptance towards such a natural right is not guaranteed. It is always something that you have to renegotiate and clarify with people over and over again. If this were not the case, all the rules that have already been established would always and everywhere be respected or would never change. We know that this is not the case.

Now, you can insist that you have a "natural right", but it can still happen (and has happened at all times and everywhere) that it is disregarded.
How else can you confront this circumstance, if it interests and concerns you, other than by
... reach an agreement in a concrete case
... go to court if no agreement has been reached...
or, because you think there is no sense or no likelihood of success in reaching agreement
... disobey (and gamble on whether your disobedience will have (uncertain) consequences)?