Ok, here I go stirring up the proverbial pot. I know this has been discussed before, and I hope it will continue to be discussed. I think that change occurs little by little, much as a boiling kettle builds steam pressure, until it finally can no longer contain the pressure and explodes.

So, anyways, I was out walking the dog and thinking, as I usually do, and probably thinking too much, as I usually do...

And I think most of the guys here at SRP are fairly reasonable and friendly, so where else would I want to pose radical and controversial topics? Blah, blah, blah...I digress..

So here's my thought:

In a trully free society, shouldn't free individuals have the freedom to make either good choices or bad? In other words, the freedom to be responsible AND irresponsible (ie - negligent)?

Should the governments of free peoples ALWAYS trust the people to make responsible choices (Kind of like assuming innocense until proven otherwise). Or, at times, corall them into being responsible via law?

In some cases goverments seem to do this (allow for irresponsible behavior. ie you can choose to steal your neighbor's property), but in other case (see below) they don't.

If your free choice to act responsibly affects no one but the acting party (ie. you), or has no ill effect at all, then all is well.

If your free choice to act in an irresponsible manner results in negligence causing some form of harm to others, then there are laws to address that negligent behavior.

Now here's the clincher (go ahead and cringe):

Of course what I'm talking about are gun laws AND the "War on drugs." I know these two topics are almost trite, they've been beaten around so much, but, when is enough enough?

So let the stones fly...what say ye all?