If you cause the problem, then you must defend yourself against the damage you do. No one is arguing differently, are they? The argument is against proactive interference and punishment through permitting and a quagmire of regulation.
"You are framing the question in a way that does not recognize that we all agree that we cannot do whatever we want on our property if it harms someone else. "
RAH, I think most of us here feel that way, but I'm a long way from being convinced that we all do.
"Summing up, I believe that people should be as free as they absolutely can until they actually hurt somebody. Like Jefferson, I don't believe you should have laws "just in case" somebody does something or thinks something up that could hurt someone. Look across the world, at all the countries, is being more free better or is being more regulated better? Always error for freedom."
And I believe in doing my best to not let it get to the point where somebody gets hurt. Personal action, state law, federal regulation, whatever it takes.
"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"
If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1) And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1) Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT? PB answer: It depends.
