[almostbusto]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
how is seizure of property ok if it's a knife?

[/ QUOTE ]

i responded to that already. if the property does not present a threat of harm it is fine...






if it presents a threat then the owner does not have the same rights. if it is actually used to inflict physical harm then it is even more imperitive that action is taken against the owner.


this is very very obvious stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

So a cell phone camera that can take upskirt photos of 12 year old girls presents no threat of harm?

[/ QUOTE ]


i was midway through an edit as you posted this. so make sure you scroll of and check out my bit on non-physical harm.

this is the important point.


a pencil CAN inflict harm.

however, there is no reason to steal someone's pencil because they COULD hurt you with it.

if they threaten you with the pencil, some action may be warranted (depending on the threat, different actions may be warranted).


if they actually stab you with the pencil, action is definitely warranted. they compromised your rights. it is your fundamental right to stop that action.


the cell phone case is similar. that is my argument. there is no reason to punish innocent parties. there is no reason to prevent good people from using a cell phone.

if someone abuses things. that should be taken care of in an effective manner that doesn't trample on anyone's rights as a human being.