>>>>For example, ambulances and firefighters are certainly also allowed to speed, when they're carrying out their duties - we've added exceptions to our laws for those circumstances, and done so as part of the normal democratic process. More mundanely, a park ranger is going to be allowed to do things like not pay the same parking fees that everyone else is allowed to, or cull animals out of season when the general population isn't allowed to hunt.

and see I do not agree with these exemptions, or rather I believe it should be acceptable for a normal person to also speed when there is an emergency that would require it. So the Police and Fire are not exempted from the law, it is simply acceptable for all persons to speed when X is happening, and in most instances X would only apply to police and fire.

The same is true for park rangers, If there is need to cull animals is should be open to all persons to cull them when the need arises. This is generally true today, as most places will hold a lottery or some other activity to give the public limited access to an area to cull the needed number of animals.

>>This is fine! In a democratic society,

It is not fine. I will set aside the fact that I am not a strong supporter of democracy, democracy is mob rule, and simply end with a Quote from an essay that I feel should be the Basis for law.

-----

The Law by Frédéric Bastiat

"What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.

Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?

If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all."

----

If you believe in individual freedom at all, then it should be held that the collective force (government) can have no more power than that of an individual, and the government does not have the legitimate authority to grant powers and privileges to one individual (police, fire etc) that are not granted to all individuals.