Rich80105 wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 16:24 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
A good discussion about an interesting philosophical issue - a shame
that discussion on others issues is met with banal swertves to party
polling (although that comes into this one as well)
http://pundit.co.nz/content/act-swings-and-misses-with-burglary-policy-reheat
Why is this one for me?
While you may not hold the same concepts of libertarianism as the ACT
Party, many of the comments to this article cover much the same issues
as you encounter from some of your posts. Do you have a view on the
desirable balance of property rights vs the size of government and the enforcement of loss of physical liberty from imprisoning burglars?
I think the primary role of the state is to protect people from harm caused
by others. Necessary with this is a police force and a justice system
including some form of prison system.
Liberty means that you should be free to do what you like as long as you
don't harm other people without their permission. If you do harm other
people without their permission then having your own liberty hampered to protect others is the fair consequence.
--
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your needs.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)