At this time I CBA to explain in detail. I may come back to it another time, but be assured that we have done this to death: since there has been no logical argument withstanding scrutiny to counter the view that if people act as if something requires a licence, sooner or later it will. Hard to believe that even though the legality of dog licences had been overturned, people used to still buy them... seriously, dog licences.
Not dangerous dog licences; dog/wolf cross licences; petrol driven robot dog licences, no, people in the 70's carried on forking out for licences for average family pets, even though even a cursory understanding of how the law works would have told you it was unenforcible, nevermind that it must contravene some kind of right we were granted in the fucking Magna Carta or something, or that if it didn't it bloody ought to so it was high time to revisit the whole concept of rebellion for redress and starting off with a bit of civil disobedience would be right in order...
Yeah, ok, so i've gone off on one and been arsed far more than i imagined i was currently capable of, but the central tenet of my point here is unassailable: we are governed by consent. Everytime we voluntarily relinquish even the slightest teaspoonful of that power, as a community, ie consent to more control than already exists, it is the nature of power and those who seek it that somebody will grasp it and sooner or later piss people off with it.