Forgot to respond to this part: Yes, that would be horrifying.

Well, I doubt that. There are a great many freedoms that I now enjoy but politicians are always trying to do away with.

Because discretion works both ways.

Every time they let someone off lightly, every little thing they ever ignored, could be recorded. They could let the teenager with the dimebag off with a warning before, but if they're on camera all the time now, discretion goes out the window.

It's worth it, though. Besides, I figure it would only take a year or two of full on enforcement of all the stupid malum prohibitum crap before some effort was made to ensure that the only things that are against the law are things that effing should be.

Yes, yes it does.

What part of

and for that matter

did you not understand?

Also, this is not about iTunes. It's about iBookStore.

From another forum, but very true:

It's always about that.

What, by being slower, and impossible to type on.

How does that help?

But this guy knowingly purchased a Ryobi, rather than a unit with SawStop, which was probably more expensive.

Are all car manufacturers that don't implement Mercedes new radar-guided emergency braking systems now liable when drivers rear end someone?

They have some competition from the DEA, which is also a relic of a pointless prohibition.

FCC: No respect for the first amendment. Makes up a list of words that are too evil to be seen on TV. Raises a huge flap because a nipple was visible. FAIL

FDA: How does a slow, ponderous regulatory body that basically achieves nothing more than UL or Consumer Reports for the drug industry, while yanking any product they don't feel like certifying "doing a good job"?

USDA: They do a pretty good job, partly because so much of their operation is A) voluntary & B) funded by the grower/packer/etc. Like a free market shop would.

Regulated time: Governments are good at creating standards bodies, and usually have the sense to not meddle with them often.

Highways: My commute has been increased by an hour every day this week except Monday. Three major roads flooded out on Monday, about 6" under water. Everyone was driving through the water on Monday, so the traffic wasn't too bad. On Tuesday, they closed all those roads, and detoured everyone 15 miles north to an already crowded highway. They still haven't managed to re-open a single one, after 4 days of sunny dry weather.

EPA: Some good, some bad. When it comes to setting standards (i.e. fuel quality), the government generally does an acceptable job. Don't get me started on the endangered species act.

OSHA: I've worked at more than one place that managed to consistently get a pass despite terrible safety standards.

Building codes: Because building a house that was six inches too tall, or had the wrong kind of grass would cause it to burn down, fall over, then sink into the swamp?

This is basically what the OP was suggesting, and was immediately attacked for.

What reasonable excuse is there for Apple to have any control over what people do with their iPhones? Once you've bought it, it's yours and you ought to be able to do whatever you want with it.

What police departments in the US seem to do is combine it with a fraudulent anonymous tip, then they get busy kicking down doors and destroying property.

Ah but what about the games that use Impulse, Direct2Drive, etc. The problem isn't Steam per se, the problem is that each publisher has at least one option, and sometimes two or three. For example, I own Red Alert 3, which I bought through Steam. But in order to play multiplayer, I need some stupid Gamespy program as well? I have Supreme commander, which I bought through Impulse, and which also requires Games for Windows Live. Why do I need 4 helper apps for 2 games?

You're kid can die while you're playing WoW too. Parent's who are trying to care for kids on heroin are negligent, but they were probably negligent before and after the heroin. When did you become the arbiter of which drugs were ok, and which were just too potent for the proletariat?

If, through negligence, you cause harm, well, that was already addressed by our legal system. Until there is a direct victim, a person who was harmed by an action, that action isn't a problem. And mandatory treatment? Maybe we should mandate treatment for people who drink too? After all that's addictive and can have consequences. Why don't we start treating people like adults: assume that they're capable of making their own decisions, and hold them accountable when (and only when) they actually do harm to others?