> No, that's exactly why they're not needed. You can't prevent those things, period, get used to it and adapt because no matter how many idiotic technical measu

> No, that's exactly why they're not needed. You can't prevent those things, period, get used to it and adapt because no matter how many idiotic technical measures So your logic is that since people will do it anyways, we don't need the laws? Do you have any idea how that sounds from a logic standpoint? "People will always murder other people, so the laws on murder are useless. Let's get rid of them". What kind of logic is that? > but it will inconvenience / trample rights / disenfranchise everybody else. Yeah, just like the laws regarding food safety inconvenience the people in the industry. "Making sure our food doesn't have salmonella before we ship it to our retailers is such an inconvenience! We should do away with those regulations." I'm sorry, but you're beginning to regurgitate libertarian nonsense. There's a reason why libertarianism never made it out of the 1800s. It's because it's an old-fashioned ideology for an old-fashioned world. It would never work in today's globalized world. Hell, it never worked period ...the fact it hasn't persisted is proof enough.