That’s what I suspected. Obviously, neither of those conducts random surprise inspections on people’s homes without evidence, which is what’d be required.
Well, in point of fact the police are empowered to do so if they have reason to believe you are committing abuse. The requirement for a reason does make the analogy imperfect.
The requirement for a reason does make the analogy imperfect.
More than just imperfect. The police being able to do so if there’s a good enough reason is very, very different from everyone being constantly aware of the fact that their home may be audited at any moment, and indeed will be audited many times over.
Isn’t this what we have, except it’s opt-out?
I don’t understand what you mean.
The claim is that the association is “government” or “modern society”.
That’s what I suspected. Obviously, neither of those conducts random surprise inspections on people’s homes without evidence, which is what’d be required.
Well, in point of fact the police are empowered to do so if they have reason to believe you are committing abuse. The requirement for a reason does make the analogy imperfect.
More than just imperfect. The police being able to do so if there’s a good enough reason is very, very different from everyone being constantly aware of the fact that their home may be audited at any moment, and indeed will be audited many times over.