<rant>
I'm also completely against anything that restricts human action (besides actions that cause harm to others such as fraud, assault, murder etc.). If the guy feels like eating at McDonalds all the time and driving his motorcycle with no helmet, that's his business. I've got the common sense not to do these things, but I have no problem with other people hurting themselves and getting fat.

Also, I don't smoke but I don't have a problem with other people doing so so long as it isn't in my house. Get cancer and die for all I care, it's your decision. If the gov't would just get it's nose out of everyone's business, the market would drive these decisions - many restaurants and public venues would still prohibit smoking to cater to the majority of us - who don't smoke.

Take all the regualtion in the UK that attempt to prevent suicide. They regulate exhaust pipes for pete's sake. You see, people could breate the fumes and die of carbon monoxide poisoning. Now new cars in the UK have a system that makes it hard to inhale the exhaust. And the fences along the train tracks to keep people from throwing themselves under a train. It is a persons OWN @^!# DECISION to kill themselves - and it isn't the government's job to make the whole world a padded cell.

Nearly all social systems are self-regulating, so long as no interference is introduced. However, a system can become dependent on the interference and lose it's ability to regulate itself when it is.

Our society as a whole has become quite dependent on regulation and government interference (ex: the entire economy hanging on Greenspan's arbitrary interest rate). I'm not very optimistic about this; we may never be free from excessive regulation again.
</rant>