This is how it feels sometimes when I am in a polite debate about rights. One time, I was talking to supposed "like" minds while they debated about whether ex-convicts could qualify for a National ID card, completely missing the point that requirement of a National ID was an infringement of my rights (I say my rights, because if people are too far gone that they cannot see the loss of rights in having to show "papers" to cross a state border, did they deserve the right to be free from it?) It's one thing to tell someone (or advocate) to do something (buy insurance) at the point of a gun (govt enforcement, robbery). Is it not the same when the govt does NOT enforce property rights (trespass, infringement, theft) and where is the cut-off (what's proper to enforce, what is force against the individual)? I am just interested in your off the cuff thoughts about it.