[henry quirk]

ph45,

You really think your rephrasing is less biased that either of my versions?

My iterations are neutral; yours drips with bias.

#

"Every action an individual takes, no matter how large or small, affects the environment around that individual."

Demonstrably not the case.

If Joe, who lives alone, masturbates himself to sleep every night, how does this affect anything (other than his bedsheets)?

Your rephrasing trades precision and accuracy for bias.

#

"At what point should society decide that restricting an individual's action benefits society more than not restricting the action?"

I'd say you restrict the individual when the individual does something worth being restricted for...that is, when he or she commits a crime. To restrict (action, ownership, etc.) before hand, in anticipation of a crime, well, defend that position if you can.


>And 'my' question stands (rephrased yet again): If Joe does wrong, with bare hand or with gun, why should Joe’s actions affect Jack's hands or Jack’s ownership of a gun?<