ethics/political question

Who's more important, the individual, or the group of individuals he belongs to?

I came to this question when I was thinking over ethics, political theories and authoritarian/libertarian differences, and I decided the answer to this question was very pertinent but I'm not sure how to go about it.

Suppose you've got a man named A, and he's in a group consisting of himself, B, C, D, and E.

I never think it's moral to do something like, force A to pay B $5, unless A had stolen it from B before hand or something.  And I find it hard to come up with an example where I think it's justifiable to force A to pay $5 to B, C, D, and E, each, but I suppose that's what I'm asking.  Is it ever alright to forcibly sacrifice some of one individual for the rest of the group?

>>2
I'm not entirely opposed to you insulting me as long as you provide your justification or some sort of opposing argument.  Then again, I didn't argue in favor of anything, so I don't know what you'd oppose; other than that I've asked a question.

>>3
Would you ever want to be the guy who gets sacrificed?  I guess I'm asking essentially if people have certain rights you shouldn't ever violate, even if the apparent gains would be better if you ignored them for that person.