Finn dAbuzz wrote:
I simply do not want a State powerful enough to kill it's citizens.
No matter whether a person or an entity any and all powers will eventually be abused.
I had overlooked this response when I said, in my last post, that I didn't notice one from you.
This is a different argument, but still one that I don't really understand. Yes, all power can be abused. But is the proper reaction to that the (impossible) demand that no one ever have any power?
Even a guy who get assessed with a parking fine can be unjustly "convicted" by an "abuse of power." Goes without saying. But what else is new?
Would you repeal a citizen's right to defend himself by resort to lethal force when necessary? Should HE have the "right" to decide who dies--either him or the criminal attacking him? Or would that be morally compromising? Should it be strictly up to the criminal to decide who, as between the two, is gunna die? At the least the citizen could die with a "clear conscious" knowing that he did not use any "power" to protect himself, eh? Maybe he would thereby be rewarded with an eternal blissful existence in heaven, I dunno.