Gun accidents? Guns are dangrous?

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]

Freedom does not mean everyone gets to do whatever they want with zero rules or regulations in place.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's exactly what freedom means. The only "rule" should be that I do indeed have a right to do whatever I want, provided I don't initiate force or fraud against another person.

[ QUOTE ]

I suppose that speed limit laws are, in a way, taking away your freedom to drive as fast as you want. And drunk driving laws restrict your freedom to drink and drive if you want to. And a law requiring a license to practice medicine is taking away the freedom to practice any profession you choose without govt interference.


[/ QUOTE ]

Your supposition is incorrect. I don't have the right to do whatever I want on someone else's property. Since the government owns most of the roads, government-imposed traffic laws on public roads do not represent a "violation" of my liberty in the slightest. On private roads, the property owner should be able to set the speed limit, or enforce none at all. Same with polices against drunk driving.

As far as medical licensing goes, doctors should be free to practice medicine without a license, provided they do not commit fraud and represent that they actually have one. Again, most of these things can be legally handled by reference to whether there is a violation of property rights, and/or an initiation of force or fraud. (Which still may be a complex issue.)

[ QUOTE ]
But there's a difference between commonsense regulations that aim to protect people, and taking away your rights as an American.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, the old appeal to "common sense" regulations, which is the universal appeal to every proposed violation of liberty.

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."

-- William Pitt