"The successful solution to every problem we ever face will always be MORE freedom, not less."

"...an often very helpful and sometimes completely necessary solution -- and it is found in the law. " I don't dispute this, but my claim is that removal of laws somewhere else would be more effective. Most laws are in response to consequences of previous law, which is why they pile up over time like an elderly person's medications, which are riddled with side effects. I think this answers many of your other points so apply it to the ones i don't specifically mention please before you think I ignored something you said. "...restraining orders, for instance..." Repeal of gun law, and much looser regulations on lethal self defense of ones self or ones family and friends. I have a CDWL, and I'm going to make a guess here and say non of us need restraining orders. This to me is a lot like the fishing parable. Teach a man to fish and he's fed for life. Teach a person to defend themselves and you don't have to defend them. The problem is, a person who can defend themselves can choose to do s from anyone, even from government. The problems of how to weaken a populace enough to rule, and yet keep it strong enough to produce are collectively called 'statecraft'. "It seems you admit law can and does produce successful solutions." Of course, but the repeal of laws produces better ones. See above. "(Your title beef)" If you want to turn this into a semantics debate, be my guest, I'm going to ignore this because neither of believe that every problem has a single solution. Granted a few might but the vast majority have many. and thus the search for the best solution because the point because semantically, an inferior solution is not a solution in the presence of a superior one. Example: The choice between taking a pill, or cutting off your hand, to prevent infection is not a real choice. "...am I misinterpreting your collection of statements on this front?" Not at all and think you for asking. The reason I worded the debate like that is because it's a quote from some guy in some other forum and it intrigued me. "(The bed straps thing)" Again, freedom would be better. But this opens up a dangerous door. Are straps any different form a padded room? From an island? From a planet? At what point does control become oppression. I think a room is better than a strap and a island is better than a room because they are 'more' free. But freedom could be seen as a binary as well, hence the danger. I'd rather not get into that (right now) as it's beyond the scope of this debate. "..you have some explaining to do for these apparent contradictions." I believe I have, but if you feel I have not please try again, and I apologize for the delay. "but if you'd like to assume that" Don't do that, if I'm wrong, call me on it. I'm not gunna hold a belief out of obstinence. Just show me. "(freeze the laws)" Fair enough. "but it will near nowhere near infinity -- and that is assuming the worst possible conditions" I disagree, the worst conditions, would lead to corruption by definition. I think you have a somewhat rosy picture of our current laws. "Law does indeed adapt..." At a fixed human speed, that slows as population increases. But the speed difference between that and nature is like trying to ride your bike to catch a jet. So effectively it's stopped. I see now that you're going to demand a wealth of hedging and qualification. I'm going to write up a general disclaimer for my debates. I should not have to put "in general" in front of everything I say and then explain how every condition has an exception. Pet peeve. If you can assume a qualification or hedge safely, please do. "This may be true, but it does not render the statement, "Some things are always the same", to be false in it of itself." Uhh, yes it does. Outside the physical constants ALL things change given sufficient time. Because 'things' are human descriptors. And we change. You speak of immortality and murder, but an immortal may have no concept of murder. And unfortunately for you I am a transhumanist, I do see immortality in our (somewhat near at these scales) future. "most laws eliminate... " Yes, once again, laws good at times, less laws better at more times. "This would mean that laws are not a wash, but indeed helpful, useful, and very often successful." So is a hack saw on the battle field, but there are better options and its our human duty to seek them out. There are alternatives to rule and coercion and law that must be explored. But before that can begin we must realize that what we have is flawed. Raw pain makes it clear that the hacksaw is flawed as a medical tool, but the law is far less blunt and far more insidious. "Some people will simply not be responsible without the restraining guidelines (along with threat of punishment) in place. " This does not justify the application of law to all people any more than shooting a mugger in the face justifies shooting your boss in the face. Your idea doesn't scale. My suggestion is guidelines and a democratic application of law. Instead of a grand jury to determine if a law has been broken a grand jury to determine if it matters in this case. Grand juries don't get to say "yes he broke the law but in this case the law was wrong" the position legally that law is always right is absurd, that is the nature of the law. Law is not a guideline, a guideline is what I suggest. Guidelines flex, laws only flex via deception, interpretation, or enforcement. The complexity of the law is such that everyone is a criminal to some degree or another. From stealing pens to jay walking to mp3s to drugs and up, everyone is a criminal to some degree. This will only get worse until we realize what law is and what to do about it. "In your next round please provide a successful solution provided by the use of more freedom-Limit." Repeal gun law, eliminate most crime. Crime is a rational behavior, ask any economist. You rob a house because the profit out weighs the risk. You've hidden your opinion on the issues so I don't know where you stand on guns. All gun law is an example of law hurting people and how simply removing them solves the problem. But again, as I said above, statecraft.