I am in favor of sensible restrictions on things that can be easily misused.
And because I am trying to move the discussion forward rather than lampoon his position, let's also include this comment:
Indeed, I see your point. As a geek and a liberal, I abhor the whole library censorship thing. I think that often they are inspired by people that don't understand the fact that information is like water in a basement. It will find a way to get out there. This applies to predators, bomb-making and sexual perversions. You cannot stop.
I can see your point fully. My quote was, I believe, regarding putting restrictions on guns. There are certainly parallels and I have not thought about it in that way before. I will consider this and get back to you if I can formulate a counter. I am pretty well stumped. For example, I suspect that shoulder-launched SAM's should not be available for purchase, but I cannot necessarily make an analogy to Internet access.
So I found this on Coyote Blog, which seems germane (although I'm working on explaining exactly how):
Everyone is a libertarian when it comes to his or her own choices:
My speech should be legal (though those other guys are over the line)
My choices, diet, lifestyle should be legal (though those other guys need to be protected from themselves)
My personal interactions are fine (but those other guys are all racists, threats to children, indecent, etc)
My business is great (but those other guys are all evil exploiters)
The hard part about defending freedom is not defending it for oneself. The hard part is defending other people's right to be free.
Apropos of something, even if ... I'm not sure ... exactly what.