personally I'm ok with dumb people getting repercussions for their actions so I'm not in favor of a nanny state

See, that is not the people deciding

If a government decides that it wants to ban porn with an iron fist that's not "people".

Roskomandzor is the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and Mass Media in Russia

and that is them telling pornhub that their demography is not a commodity to be exploited

Thts just it, you cant just let dumb people do dumb shit and it NOT affect society

The random house shooting is an exaple

sure they might "face the reprecussions" but your family is dead. so who cares?

the random house shooting is already banned/illegal

Those goddamn authoritarians telling me i cant practice shooting at random houses

fucking Nazis

that has nothing to do with my arguments or your arguments

BASED

Sure it does. The whole point from the start isn't the benefits or detriments of pr0ns. I honestly dont care which way that ends up. my point is WHY do we pick and choose what the government decides what is detrimental to society.

you're telling me that on one hand, people should decide what is allowed based on what they think is a benefit, yet on the other hand even if they think its a benefit it still shouldn't be allowed

You still refuse to define "people"

well, you used the term first

you seem unhappy with individuals deciding for themselves

Are you talking about small groups of individuals or society as a large chunk?

Only insofar as that decisions can affect other people.

No decision is truly individual. We are just led to THINK that

so we can avoid blame for our actions

ok, if 51% of the population decided to buy gold tomorrow, the price of gold would go up, having an effect on the other 49% so that's not allowed?/

Ah! In many countries, what you just said, IS BANNED

Try that in India

buying gold?

yes

once again, not saying its right or wrong, but that gets determined at a gov level

Consider yourself lucky you are allowed to in the west. most of it anyway

sure but that's not the people

well, not ALL people. Some. The question is, does the Gov represent the people? When does it represent them and not?

I mean you started using the term people when you said people should decide what is a benefit

to me people means individual humans

OK, lets define the term so we can quit being nebulous about it.

To me "people" is the will of the largest homogeneous block

or at least A homogeneous block.

Individuals are honestly quite useless on their own.

I don't really have an image in my head of what the largest homogenous block looks like exactly

In any "nation" really.

do you mean like, a block of people with the same opinion?