I think you're asking the wrong question.

You should be asking, "How can the actions of an individual "spoil things" for the wider group?"

I mean, if the bloke is committing some sort of crime, why should you suffer? Surely, the responsibility resides solely with him?

If you get drunk and run someone down, I don't expect to be the one who faces a driving ban ... that would be both illogical and unjust. Is your regulatory system unjust?

It's the gun-grabbers' argument, "Let's punish the people who didn't do it."

I thought that the Constitution was supposed to protect the individual from the whim of his neighbours; and the machinations of government officials.



Now, if I had a vested interest in building up the club' membership, it might suit me to have such a system ... I could use it as a lever with which to motivate the troops, "If you don't police these people, we'll all suffer. Go and bring 'em into the fold."

Gosh, I'm cynical.