And I hope when you do, you get thrown in jail for doing so when there are better and more responsible actions out there. 

Though to be honest, I ain't got shit worth stealing.

I'm sure that will help out my orphan children in their life. 

It's a shame you'd be so irresponsible with children.

At least it's better then being a drunk who sticks around and ends up beating their children.

Or just shitty parents in general who are abusive.  It's not like you can make people take a parenting test before they can have kids.

You're right, we need to ban alcohol too. And make people take parenting tests.

What most people in the US mean by freedom is the establishment and protection of personal liberty.  Has nothing to do with wanting the world to comform to them but wanting the authority in power to remain limited in its authority as established by the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

For those in many 3rd world nations, freedom means the release from an oppressive or tyrannical regime.

And I will ask if that is what people, deep down, really want.  Or do they more likely want to get what they want to get in life.  They don't want their ability to do things hindered, and they want to have the means to get what one wants.  Would people chose to be in a place where they can go anywhere, where limits on resources restrict what they will get, or live in a prison of sorts where every whim is tended to, balanced by some restrictions a person wants, to prevent them from undermining what they really want to get, like good health and so on?

You're asking for people to pass internal judgement on a potential desire that is impossible to achieve.

The human nature of hedonism and reduction of pains suggests that people would choose absolute desire yet at the same time it's human nature to feel pride which suggest we want to achieve our desires through effort. 

However, I don't think this relates at all to the "freedom" that people demand.

Freedom and other political and economic concepts are mental constructs people use to understand and manage the world they live in.  It is a way to organize data they receive from the world.  So, in light of this, one approach to understand what people want is to provide a theoretical ideal state that would map to this, and see if it is what people are really after.  The impossible makes the ideals more clear in this context.

I would say, in light of this, if enough people were given stuff to placate their appetites and desires, in ways they didn't find personally destructive, a state could be one that could ultimately end up oppressive, and people wouldn't know it or care to know.  And in this, that is what I was asking about, if it really is freedom people value or merely the placating of appetites and desires. 

Next up, an analysis of Brave New World.

Well, there is a school of thought that Americans had become so content with their lives that they turned a blind eye to the oppression, lies, subjugation and dismantling of the Constitution (at least until the recent economic crisis that is).  The vigilance over the maintaining of freedoms, liberty and rights faltered by the comfort of false economic prosperity.

You're pretty much correct. We can call the repeal of DADT to be liberty but call the second amendment idiocy, or vice versa ("You can pry this gun from my cold dead hands, but i'll use it to shoot any f*gs as think they can get hitched," or something like that)

Freedom is relative. Communism was freedom in its own right, and the revolutions that toppled Communism also cried freedom. The freedom-loving founding fathers held slaves, etc., etc.,