[hrbf]

Trivial as compared to taking away the freedom of being able to purchase stuff like that at all via mail order – which I do not necessarily consider to be a reasonable request, nor do I agree with the lawsuit as is. There are already established mechanisms to verify age and identity in place to do that, package delivery companies do it all the time. It’s simply more expensive to do that. But Amazon clearly did not respond to reasonable discourse. I fail to see what you consider radical or restricting about my position.

There was also a quickly deleted response accusing me of ”pathological empathy that would abandon any principled position if it offered an immediate salve” to my “emotional panic”.

I believe this reveals more about the character and expectations of the commenter than anything else. To their credit, they deleted it.

Rational discourse about touchy subjects appears to be largely impossible. I expected better from HN. It doesn‘t follow that because you apparently hold an absolutist stance regarding what you consider freedom to be, that I am on the opposite end of this absolutism.

[catiopatio]

> I fail to see what you consider radical or restricting about my position.

Society should not bear the cost or responsibility for parenting other people’s children and preventing all possible accidents, much less willful self-harm.

The possibility of bad things happening is the cost of having a healthy, responsible, capable society of well-adjusted adults.