The first theory is that government should only regulate personal behavior when a person 's behavior may have significant adverse impact on the well-being of other persons. I agree with this theory and I am prepared to live …show more content…
I agree to this theory. Basic rights such as voting, freedom of religion, the right to have a fair trial, and the right to bare arm should not be taken away from citizens. We have walked so far and gone through so much to receive these rights that I believe it should not be taken away. If it was better before citizens had these rights why were these rights even establish up until today? I admit there are cons to citizens having the right to own a gun, but the pros surpass the cons. The cons include, the misuse or abuse of weapons. The pros include less crime, self-protection, and a sense of safety. The government should not take basic rights and freedom away from citizens because often times the rights citizens have to make them feel safe and secure enough that fewer problems …show more content…
The government should encourage the maintenance of truly competitive private markets for goods and services. I firmly agree with this theory. If I own a market, I would surely live by this theory. If there aren’t competitive markets, the market will lose the motivation to strive and improve themselves. Competition keeps things going and keeps markets, companies, and individuals to better themselves. If there are only one supermarket, nail salon, insurance company, etc prices can increase drastically and dramatically with poor quality and services. Without other companies to compete, companies would think to themselves… why make prices low? Why improve when there is no other company that is better? People will have to resort to us anyway. I believe the government should support the maintenance of truly competitive private markets to produce goods and services so that companies can better