It isn’t compatible with basic principles of liberal government to offer “What’s the harm?” as the basis for a restriction or policy. There needs to be a clear

It isn’t compatible with basic principles of liberal government to offer “What’s the harm?” as the basis for a restriction or policy. There needs to be a clear and just basis for government action, and a commitment to repealing or abolishing policies that do not prove to be worthwhile. The same thing goes for asking “Why do you need that?” and if people don’t have a reason you like, taking that as a basis for restriction. In a free society, the people don’t need a reason — we can do what we like. It’s the government that needs a reason. We should be questioning proposed policies, with an eye to the public benefit, not because of any love of guns, but merely out of a basic requirement for government accountability.