03-16-2014, 07:10 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2014, 07:29 PM by Director Michael.)
First of all, we are not at all saying that such onerous confiscation would be a rightful thing to do. Rather, this is offered as a good analogy for illustrating a scenario in which the officers themselves would not be personally guilty of theft, because they were acting on the orders of the (oppressive) government and they were not taking the property for themselves.
On the other hand, if a government dispatches officers to kill innocent people, G-d forbid, the officers themselves who commit the act are guilty of murder.
As an addendum, it is clear that every society will place limits on what a person is legally permitted to own in his possession, for the sake of the safety of the general population. For example, a government might make it illegal for private persons to own dangerous animals like lions or tigers, or to harbor weapons of mass destruction, or powerful narcotic drugs. And the government might empower officers to confiscate such items from a person's private home. In large part the propriety of such laws depends on the consensus of the general population, along with adherence to the principles of due process. And most societies delegate powers to their government to watch over their general welfare, to protect them from evil or negligent people in their midst, which will include sensible limits on what a person is allowed to own in his personal possession. A government which goes beyond this and overreaches may very well be dictatorial.
On the other hand, if a government dispatches officers to kill innocent people, G-d forbid, the officers themselves who commit the act are guilty of murder.
As an addendum, it is clear that every society will place limits on what a person is legally permitted to own in his possession, for the sake of the safety of the general population. For example, a government might make it illegal for private persons to own dangerous animals like lions or tigers, or to harbor weapons of mass destruction, or powerful narcotic drugs. And the government might empower officers to confiscate such items from a person's private home. In large part the propriety of such laws depends on the consensus of the general population, along with adherence to the principles of due process. And most societies delegate powers to their government to watch over their general welfare, to protect them from evil or negligent people in their midst, which will include sensible limits on what a person is allowed to own in his personal possession. A government which goes beyond this and overreaches may very well be dictatorial.