Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FatFreeGoodness
OK… let's just consider rules that protect no one but the one being injured, and where the injured is a sound-minded adult. I have a hard time thinking of an example of these. Drugs? No, since buying drugs keeps pushers and smugglers around, and they do affect others. Drugs when you make/grow your own? But you do admit that addicts tend to be a burden to those around them, don’t you? Doesn’t it make sense to prevent this?
How will you decide whether anyone else is being protected? Is this another case of "just ignore rules you don't like."? Again... if you are free to do this, then basically you are saying you are free to ignore any rule at all.
|
What you say has the ring of truth to it, the problem is there is no end to the list of things we do that may cause a burden to society. As I understand it, during prohibition even the Mayors and Police Chiefs of most major cities could be found in the local speakeasys. The law was disobeyed by so many citizens that they had to eventually repeal it.
Sure, there are many good laws that protect us, but our government has a bad track record of going overboard. The trick is of course, where do you draw the line. Like most people, I don't know, but I will say that most times it is more important to err on the side of freedom over safety. Just how much control should the government have over our lifestyles and how many years should we wait before bad laws get repealed?
Also our polititians from both parties are beholden to and depend on funds from special interest groups for their survival. Many laws get passed that seem to make little sense to the average citizen. The recently passed bankruptcy rules that do not excempt those with horrendous medical bills is a good example. Unfortunately there is no easy way to disobey this one.