“Truth? You can't handle the truth!”

[TordelBack]

Stepping back for a moment from what is increasingly reminding me of Guard-o-ped from  'Are you tired of being mugged?' (Prog 354, CF 7), one of my fundamental problems with Sharkworld is the sheer amount of time and energy I'm going to have to put into providing myself with basic services. I have to actively choose, oversee and assess my police force, my legal system, my roads maintenance division, my local hospital, my food safety inspections, my local pollution levels, my education system etc etc... Right now I delegate and pay local and national governments to do that stuff, and I don't even have the time to keep proper tabs on them.

And this really is my point: if I (and my fellow citizenry) are not currently sufficiently engaged with the folks who are delegated to manage the complex logistical and specialist webs of modern society to make them do a good job, are we really going to take on the burdens of micro-management of every aspect of our world?  I can't even decide on a private rubbish collection company, I'd much rather pay the Council to do it like I used to. I, and I suspect the majority, actually prefer delegating thinking about all this crap.

And if we did have the energy and enthusiasm for this kind of of non-stop decision making, would we not be better directing it at keeping our current representatives in line?

It all reminds me of my days of running a company, when I decided that since I knew a bit the best way to manage the 25 or 30  office computers was to do all the maintenance myself, rather than hire someone for something that wasn't a full time job, or pay some external crowd. Great idea, but some days it seemed like it was all I did, and there were more important things I really should have been attending to.

[ZenArcade]

Sharky, have you been reading the 'ungoverned' by Vernor Vinge again?? Z

[The Legendary Shark]

Not so much a breakthroughs a massive hole in your line of reasoning.  I could have just mowed down a line of pensioners on their way to the soup kitchen.  Private security guards have no authority over me unless I accept their authority.  Same with private courts...they find against me, I can just pick another one and pay them enough money so they find in my favour.  Law and security for the wealthy and to hell with everyone else.

Damn, and I thought you were getting it. Okay, let's take a look at three scenarios from the mundane to the monstrous.

1: You're driving your car along the M6 Toll and a private police patrol vehicle slots in behind you. It's dark and pissing down with rain. You're not worried because you haven't done anything wrong and, even if you had, you know your rights. The patrol car gives you a quick flash of its beacons and the matrix on the front says "PLEASE STOP." You don't stop because you don't have to. You know you don't have to, they know you don't have to. So you keep going. They keep following. They keep requesting you to stop. Maybe you give them the finger but you keep going. F*ck those do-gooder assholes! They follow you until you exit the toll road, their jurisdiction, and then let you go off on your own. But there's another private patrol car waiting on the slip road, with a different jurisdiction. The private police in this car try to flag you down but, you know, f*ck 'em, right? This car follows you too until it too leaves its jurisdiction. Another one follows you instead. Then another. Then another. All the way home.

When you arrive home, you discover your tail lights aren't working. The police merely wanted to tell you this but, because you were exercising your right not to stop, they never got the chance. As you had not committed any loss, harm or damage to others, there was nothing they could do except follow you - not to intimidate you or issue you with a ticket (they can't do either of these things because they're police constables, tasked with upholding the law and protecting the general public on their beat and not, as we have today, police officers whose task is to enforce regulation and raise revenue for the state) but to protect other road users; using their own tail-lights to stop other motorists ploughing into the back of you due to the poor visibility conditions. Some weeks later, you may get a bill if any private police cars had been forced to deviate from the routes or tasks demanded of them by their respective employers in order to protect other road users from your idiocy.

But say it was a little more serious than that, your rear bumper was hanging off and you didn't know. Again, they ask you to stop but you refuse. In that case, the patrol car stays behind you in order to "take the hit" if your bumper does come off - protecting other road-users, as is their job. They may even dispatch another car to ride beside the first, protecting the middle lane. As you leave the M6 Toll, they'd have radioed ahead to the next private police agency so that they could do the same and follow you. If your bumper comes off and hits any of the police cars, you will get billed for repairing the damage. If there's any damage to the road, you'll be billed for that as well. If only you'd stopped! In the first instance, the police might have had some spare bulbs and fuses aboard to help you fix your tail lights - they might have sold them to you or given them to you depending on the calibre of the agency involved. They'd have escorted you to a garage or service station, called out the AA for you. Helped you - because that's why they're there. In the second instance, they might have had some zip-ties or string aboard to help you tie your bumper up as a temporary fix until you could get it properly looked at. But no, you had to exercise your rights and, as a consequence, incurred costs.

2: You've stolen my car and you're driving it along the M6 Toll and a private police patrol vehicle slots in behind you.  The patrol car gives you a quick flash of its beacons and the matrix on the front says "PLEASE STOP." This time, knowing they can't drag you out of the stolen car and haul you away because that's assault (which is a worse crime than theft) you stop and wind the window down. The private constable gets out and politely informs you that you're driving a stolen vehicle. You tell him that you know and ask him what he's going to do about it. He tells you that he's currently doing all he can and advises you to return the vehicle to its owner (while you're not looking, maybe he or his colleague places a GPS tracker on the car) as soon as possible. You tell him to f*ck off and drive away. He doesn't follow you but instead calls my insurance company, to whom I reported the theft. It was my insurance company who reported the theft to the private police network. The private patrolman reports what he knows, gives the frequency of the GPS tracker and uploads the video of your conversation taken with his uniform-cam. Then the patrolman gets on with the business of his assigned duties.

My insurance company sends out a specialist recovery team in unmarked vehicles, including an investigator and a couple of private police constables. They wait for you to stop and exit the vehicle - which you have to do at some point. Then they seize the vehicle and put it on the back of a recovery truck. If you try to attack the recovery team, or if the recovery team try to attack you, the constables step in to prevent it. You are not arrested because that's kidnapping, worse than theft. The recovery team ask you for the car keys. You refuse to give the keys to them. They shrug and leave, taking the car with them and leaving you behind. The investigator, and maybe the constables, remain. The investigator asks you your name and address. You refuse to say anything because that's your right, right? Right. So the investigators follow you, do some investigating and find out who you are.

Several days later you are presented with a bill from my insurance firm for all the time and resources expended in recovering my car, the petrol you've used, the tracker and any damage you've done. You refused to return the keys so all the locks and ignition had to be replaced - you're charged for that, too. If you refuse to pay, you're sued. If only you'd followed that jumped-up do-gooder's advice and returned my car straight away, you wouldn't have such a lot of money to pay out right now!

You refuse to pay because you know they can't just come along and take your money or your stuff because that's theft, right? You are invited, through your own insurance company if you have one or directly if you don't, to attend a voluntary hearing at a reputable private court. You don't turn up because you don't have to. So you are tried in absentia and all the evidence gathered proves your guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. All the costs so far are added up and you are sent a bill. You ignore it. You are sent another bill and advice on what to do if you can't pay. You ignore that, too, because that is your right. You are sent a final bill - each one slightly more expensive than the last due to the extra work involved - along with a notice that if you do not make some arrangement to pay off your debt immediately, your name will be added to the Dishonourable Register. All you do is laugh, because that's so lame. The Dishonourable Register! What a joke!

Then you start receiving letters. The first one comes from your bank. They've used whatever money was left in your account to pay off your credit card, cancelled the card and closed your account. As signators to the Voluntary Banking Code, your bank takes the Dishonourable Register seriously and has a policy of not allowing anyone on that list access to their services as they have proven they cannot be trusted. Then comes one from Sky TV - they'll still provide you with a service but insist that you pay six months in advance otherwise your subscription will be cancelled. Then come letters from your ISP and 'phone provider with similar content. Your insurance company. Your mortgage provider. The private school where you send your kids. Your local newsagent is more understanding, he doesn't mind you still getting your Prog and Meg from him but, from now on, you can't have them unless you pay for them first; no more credit. Then a letter from your boss - the firm you work for is applying for Voluntary Business Code status to increase business and thus have agreed to take the Dishonourable Register seriously. As your name is on that register, unfortunately they're going to have to let you go. They're sad to lose you, though, and will offer you any help you need to get your name taken off the Register - just make an appointment with Zoe in HR and she'll help you set up a monthly payment scheme with the people you owe the money to. No biggie. You find all this intolerable and unfair and write to private courts and arbitration services to take the original agency who sued you to court. Unfortunately, you've been blacklisted from most courts and the few who are willing to look at your case find the already submitted evidence against you compelling and cannot help you. You are in dishonour and individuals and businesses have every right to refuse to deal with you, just as you initially refused to deal with the private police. Of course, this is a libertarian society and there are many charities who will help you find food, clothing and shelter and you'll be able to live of the backs of private charities for as long as you want. Or you could give up and realise that living in a self-regulating society means that you have to take responsibility for your own actions in order to play a full part in it.

[The Legendary Shark]

3: You're so angered by my last post that you get in your car, find me and deliberately run me over - killing me outright. You flee down the M6 Toll and a private police patrol vehicle slots in behind you.  The patrol car gives you a quick flash of its beacons and the matrix on the front says "PLEASE STOP." You refuse, because they've got no right to force you to do anything, right? But, what's this? Another three patrol cars appear and box you in, bringing you to a halt. They ask you to step out of the vehicle but you refuse. So they smash the window and drag you out. This is assault, yes, but assault is a lesser crime than murder. They handcuff you and arrest you. This is kidnapping but, again, kidnapping is a lesser crime than murder. You are put in a holding cell.

If you subscribe to a private insurance or protection company they dispatch help in the form of lawyers, advisors and maybe even a couple of private constables to ensure your safety. My private insurance company presents you with a choice of private courts which have proven to be professional and impartial in cases like this. You can pick one or suggest your own at the advice of your own company. If you refuse to choose, one will be chosen for you - your own company will insist on the one chosen being known to it and of reputable standing - and you will be put on trial.

You are found guilty of premeditated murder.

Now comes the one part of a libertarian society that I am truly uncomfortable with. As I have paid the ultimate price for your rage, the ultimate sanction must also be an option. Execution. However, the sentence is not decided by legislation, the jury or even the judge. A range of sentences is put on offer and my next of kin decides what it wants. They may decide to forgive you. They may decide to request a flogging or an amputation. They may decide to have you imprisoned for life. They may decide to have you executed. Or they may allow you to buy your way out of such "eye-for-an-eye" justice. Indeed, I may have written into my will the sentence I would prefer in the event I was murdered, sparing my loved ones this difficult choice. In any event, your fate is now in the hands of your victim's kin so you'd better pray they're better libertarians than you are. In the event, it happens that I have stipulated "payment restitution only" in my will and all the court, jury, kin and yourself have to decide is the amount to be paid. They settle on £1,000,000. Even if everything you own is sold, you still don't have close to that amount (and you've got all the court costs and agency fees to pay as well) - so, what's the solution? It's not £250,000 and an amputation or £500,000 and a flogging (although it might be in other cases, I have stipulated "payment restitution only" because I don't believe in that kind of barbarity, so it's kinda' lucky you murdered me and not Ian Duncan Smith) - the only thing left is the libertarian prison, where you will be enslaved.

Yes, enslaved.

A libertarian prison would be some kind of business; maybe a farm, a factory, a workshop or any other kind of enterprise. You would be taken to this prison-factory/workhouse and given a job. Your wage would be on a par with what non-prisoners earn in the free world. However, out of this wage would be taken a portion for your upkeep (room, board, clothing, laundry, water, electricity, healthcare etc.), a portion for the running of the prison (guards, administration, building maintenance, etc.), a portion for you to use how you wish (to purchase little luxuries like tobacco, alcohol, comfy slippers, your weekly Prog, to send home to your family, to put aside against the day of your release so you don't leave with nothing, a combination, etc.) - but the lion's share goes to paying off your debt to your victim or, more likely, to paying off the loan taken out in your name to compensate your victim. If you work really hard, doing overtime and earning bonuses, you might have paid off what you owe in under twenty years. Or if you're lazy it might take you thirty years, forty or never. The length of your sentence is, at least partially, up to you.

But that's a crap idea - it means a rich man can buy his way out of any crime!

It means a rich man can buy his way out of any crime if the victim agrees to it. I've strayed from the three scenarios somewhat so I might as well carry on and add one last example - the vicious multi-millionaire scenario.

Let's imagine there's this very, very rich man who likes going around breaking people's arms. He's taken to court for assault and generally pays his victims £20,000 and then walks free to do it again. Then he breaks my arm and I sue him in court. I know that I can request to have his arm broken if I want (any physical harm dished out could only be on a par with the harm done to me and maybe slightly more - no breaking both his arms, or all his limbs, or execution - conversely, I could let him off with a good slapping or a punch in the face, to be administered by Court Bailiffs, whose fees would be paid by the criminal) but I don't hold with that kind of thing. He offers me the same £20,000 and I agree, on the provision that he does so via the  prison-factory/workhouse system. He doesn't like the sound of this so offers me £40,000, then £80,000, then £100,000. But no, I'm happy with the twenty thousand, I'm not greedy and this jerk needs to be taught a lesson. So off to the prison-factory/workhouse he goes to pay off his debt through hard work like anyone else. How long it takes is largely up to him. If he's lazy and awkward it might take him a very long time. Indeed, a poor prisoner owing the same amount, admitted on the same day might, through sheer hard work and diligence, serve his sentence in half the time.

Slavery is one of the most despicable states in which a human being can be held. Libertaria recognises this and so reserves its use as punishment - but in a humanitarian and productive way. Modern prisons in today's statist society enslave people for arbitrary periods of time and then do nothing with them beyond locking them up like animals in cells for up to 23 hours a day. That's just cruel.

[The Legendary Shark]

And, yes, I do pay for healthcare through my taxes...unless, of course, I can't.  In which case society pays for me.  In Libertania, if I can't pay I'm fucked unless I happen to have wealthy friends.

Oh. what a brave new world.

In Libertaria, healthcare will be run by the free-market, free from wasteful and costly "government" interference, and will therefore be cheaper and more efficient. If you do turn up at a hospital with a life-threatening injury or condition, you won't be turned away if you don't have your own insurance. Hospitals will add a small percentage to pay for treatment of people like you to the premiums of those subscribers willing to pay it and use those extra contributions to maintain an emergency fund. When you are discharged, you might be asked to make a donation to the amount of whatever you feel you can afford or you might wait until you are in a better position and then make your donation in the future. You will be asked for money if you are poor, but you will not be forced to pay. You might even volunteer to go into a prison-factory/workhouse in order to pay off some or all of the costs of your treatment but, unlike the prisoners you'll be working with, you'll be free to leave at any time. And there will still be private charities.

Dear Aldi Legal Assistant,

Thank you for recent correspondence regarding our clients' dispute.
After discussion I must agree that my client, on whose good fortune and continued custom my companies relies, is not in the wrong.  I'm glad that we've been able to come to this arrangement like the professionals we are.

In the event that you are not satisfied with this response, we are willing to take the matter further.  In the past we have used EDX Arbitration Services and are happy to refer the issue to them.  Our company has a long history of co operation with EDX.  In fact, we are their biggest client.  I am sure, however, that they will be completely impartial, despite all the money we give them.

Our invoice is enclosed.  Please pay within 28 days, or a private security company will be employed to follow you around. Feel free to employ your own protection should you feel threatened.

Yours,
Apple Legal.

Dear Apple Legal,

Having examined the record of EDX, and having dealt with them ourselves on numerous occasions, we find them to be an excellent choice. Their reputation for fairness and impartiality is second to none, which is why they attract such illustrious clients as yourselves and Aldi Legal Assistance. The fact that they recently ruled against IBM, one of their oldest and largest clients (almost as big a client as you), confirms this reputation is justified.

Will you make the arrangements with EDX Arbitration Services yourself or would you like me to do it? I can have the contract of arbitration agreement signed and in the post by 9am tomorrow, if this is convenient.

Yours,
Aldi Legal Assistance Co.


Tordels - you are absolutely right, it is a lot of work. However, consider this - you already spend a lot of time each year dealing with "government" forms to organise this kind of thing so it's simply a matter of switching one set of forms for another, the chief difference being that you have a choice whether or not you want to pay or how much you're willing/able to pay and you won't end up fined or in jail if you decide not to play along with certain things.

Consider also that where there's work, there's opportunity. Companies will spring up dedicated to relieving you of this burden, much like an insurance broker. They may send you a form once a year where you take advantage of their research and expertise in evaluating and engaging the available companies. They might offer you something really simple and quick, like maybe their Premium, Standard or Budget packages. They may offer you a multiple choice form where you choose each service individually on the basis of their ratings and cost/value analysis or even the choice to pick whichever companies you choose based on your own research or a combination of all, and more than, the above.

These companies might make all the yearly paperwork the "government" forces you to do look like the central planning admin for a small African republic. When presented with Premium, Standard or Budget, this whole process could take you less than five minutes a year.


Zen - never heard of it! Is it any good?

[Modern Panther]

free from wasteful and costly "government" interference, and will therefore be cheaper and more efficient.

Like they are in all countries with private healthcare.  It's as valid an argument as saying in Libertanian no one will get sick because fairies will chase away all the germs.

Hospitals will add a small percentage to pay for treatment of people like you to the premiums of those subscribers willing to pay it and use those extra contributions to maintain an emergency fund.

Now I'm relying on the charity of the wealthy. 

You might even volunteer to go into a prison-factory/workhouse in order to pay off some or all of the costs of your treatment

"Are there no prisons? Are there no work houses?".  Let the poor go there, its not like they've got jobs to do.

Dear Aldi Legal,
Thank you for your letter.  Aren't we lucky that having money, and the promise of making more money, automatically makes people reasonable?  I'm off to watch one of my work house slaves count my cash.
Yours,
Apple.

Question Sharks...If you where one of those libertarians, you know, the self interested rich ones, how would you have answered that question differently?

[Modern Panther]

Just noticed your earlier posts and  ,Sharky, this is nothing if not elaborate.  Overwhelming numbers of private police, with top of the range technology, all paid for through road tolls.  Police who can investigate me, even though they have no power to investigate me.  Courts which aren't actually courts who can take money, even though they don't have authority, and its not stealing. Shooting people who break the laws which aren't there, even though we can prove that they've broken the law because we don't have the power to detain anyone, never mind question them. And slaves! In Libertanian, to ensure our freedom, we make people into slaves! But that's okay, because they're naughty people.  Well, we think they might be.  They might just be poor.

[The Legendary Shark]

free from wasteful and costly "government" interference, and will therefore be cheaper and more efficient.

Like they are in all countries with private healthcare.  It's as valid an argument as saying in Libertanian no one will get sick because fairies will chase away all the germs.

In countries with private healthcare, including this one, "government" taxation, tariffs, licenses etc. add to the cost both directly and indirectly. I think the fairies are all in your mind.

Now I'm relying on the charity of the wealthy. 

Actually, you're relying on the charity of ordinary people. The same people who throw a few coppers in the collection box to keep air ambulances in the sky, the same people who donate to cancer research and hospices. People, in short, with a social conscience.

You might even volunteer to go into a prison-factory/workhouse in order to pay off some or all of the costs of your treatment

"Are there no prisons? Are there no work houses?".  Let the poor go there, its not like they've got jobs to do.

Did you miss the word "volunteer"? If some hospital saved my life, I'd at least consider finding a way to give something back. Perhaps you're different - perhaps you believe that you have a right to getting anything you want and not needing to put anything back. Volunteering to go into a prison-factory/workhouse in order to pay off a debt you have no legal obligation to pay off, if you're poor and unemployed, demonstrates a level of honesty and honour that many employers will find appealing. Just as the prisoner who works hard to pay off his debt to his victim in a shorter time than expected would also demonstrate to prospective employers his worth as an employee.

Dear Aldi Legal,
Thank you for your letter.  Aren't we lucky that having money, and the promise of making more money, automatically makes people reasonable?  I'm off to watch one of my work house slaves count my cash.
Yours,
Apple.

Dear Apple Legal,

It is becoming increasingly obvious that you are not taking your responsibilities as a private legal protection firm seriously.

In accordance with my last letter, I have placed the signed documents in the post this morning. If you do not sign and return them within 28 days of this letter, we will have no option but to begin proceedings to add you to the Dishonourable Register. How many rich clients will you have then?

Question Sharks...If you where one of those libertarians, you know, the self interested rich ones, how would you have answered that question differently?

I wouldn't, because I understand that being rich is a privilege that can evaporate very quickly in the business world. I like being rich and I want to be richer. If achieving this goal means I have to pander to the airy-fairy libertarian whims of the unwashed pillocks from whom my fortune is derived, then I'll do it. I'll do in spades and I'll do it with a huge, cheesy smile on my face.

[Professor Bear]

I posit an alternative to Sharktopia: we do things exactly as we do now, but we introduce legislation that allows citizens to smash politicians' legs with hammers as/when/if they feel like it.  If nothing else, this will lead to much better wheelchair accessibility.

[The Legendary Shark]

Just noticed your earlier posts and  ,Sharky, this is nothing if not elaborate.  Overwhelming numbers of private police, with top of the range technology, all paid for through road tolls.  Police who can investigate me, even though they have no power to investigate me.  Courts which aren't actually courts who can take money, even though they don't have authority, and its not stealing. Shooting people who break the laws which aren't there, even though we can prove that they've broken the law because we don't have the power to detain anyone, never mind question them. And slaves! In Libertanian, to ensure our freedom, we make people into slaves! But that's okay, because they're naughty people.  Well, we think they might be.  They might just be poor.

Now you're just making stuff up. "Overwhelming numbers"? Where did you get that from? Police who investigate you, where did you get that from? Courts that aren't courts? Where did you get that from? Courts who can take money? Where did you get that from? Shooting people? Where the fuck did you get that from? Laws which aren't there? Where did you get that from? Don't have the power to detain anybody? Where did you get that from? Slavery as a punishment, yes - that's something you did see right but chose to be emotive over rather than think about. They might just be poor (and made to be slaves)? Where did you get that from?

[The Legendary Shark]

I posit an alternative to Sharktopia: we do things exactly as we do now, but we introduce legislation that allows citizens to smash politicians' legs with hammers as/when/if they feel like it.  If nothing else, this will lead to much better wheelchair accessibility.

Heh. Tempting, but no.

[Professor Bear]

You don't get to unilaterally decide these things - Hammertopia goes to a vote.

[Modern Panther]

Overwhelming numbers"? Where did you get that from?

This car follows you too until it too leaves its jurisdiction. Another one follows you instead. Then another. Then another. All the way home.

you refuse, because they've got no right to force you to do anything, right? But, what's this? Another three patrol cars appear

Next...

Police who investigate you, where did you get that from?

Your absolutely right.  I apologize for misreading.  Rather than powerless security guards it's powerless insurance company employees...

So the investigators follow you, do some investigating and find out who you are.

Courts...

Courts that aren't courts? Where did you get that from?

a voluntary hearing at a reputable private court.

My private insurance company presents you with a choice of private courts

Courts taking money...

courts who can take money? Where did you get that from?

They've used whatever money was left in your account to pay off your credit card, cancelled the card and closed your account.

Executing undesirables...

Shooting people? Where the fuck did you get that from?

As I have paid the ultimate price for your rage, the ultimate sanction must also be an option. Execution. However, the sentence is not decided by legislation, the jury or even the judge. A range of sentences is put on offer and my next of kin decides what it wants. They may decide to forgive you. They may decide to request a flogging or an amputation. They may decide to have you imprisoned for life. They may decide to have you executed.

Power as a finite resource...

Don't have the power to detain anybody?

The right of the "state" stem only from the rights of the individual.  The many can hold no more authority that the one.  Unless I have the right to detain, the many have no right to detain.

Slavery, which is so much better than one of those Statist "prisons"...

Slavery as a punishment, yes - that's something you did see right.

Slavery is one of the most despicable states in which a human being can be held. Libertaria recognises this and so reserves its use as punishment - but in a humanitarian and productive way.

Many slave owners thought the same way.

It means a rich man can buy his way out of any crime if the victim agrees to it.

By the same reasoning, it means a poor man could never buy his way out, unless the victim agrees to it.

So off to the prison-factory/workhouse he goes to pay off his debt through hard work like anyone else. How long it takes is largely up to him.

Maybe we could engrave something inspiring above the door...

[The Legendary Shark]

Five or six cars in the first instance and three in the second overwhelming numbers? Where do you live? Antarctica?

They are powerless to hurt you, yes. Powerless to investigate you, no. (Actually, technically they do have the power to hurt you, they just don't have the right. I have the right to try and jump over the Atlantic, but I don't have the power to.)

Again, the word "voluntary" is key. If both parties agree to abide by their decision, then its a court by consent. If one party doesn't agree, sure, it can't issue a binding judgement - but it can give its expert and considered opinion which, in the absence of a valid challenge, can be acted upon by the party who does agree. That party is then free to pursue other avenues, lawful avenues, of recompense. This is in the case of non-violent crimes. In the case of violent crimes such as murder, rape and assault, the criminal, by breaking the most fundamental laws of society, has forfeited any right to refuse to accept the judgement of a widely respected appropriate court.

That's the bank taking money to pay off the money you owe them (I'll grant that might be a grey area, but no more than that - if a person is in dishonour then the bank has the right to protect itself from fraud or theft). The court takes no money other than the fees agreed to by both parties prior to doing its work.

Execution automatically means shooting people? No it doesn't. You present "shooting people" entirely out of context in a lawless Wild West kind of way as if it's going to be a regular and unavoidable thing.

Anybody has the right to detain a murderer, rapist or violent attacker (within reasonable limits) as part of the basic right of self defence. That "anybody" includes paid police.

Many slave owners may have thought the same way but very few, if any, paid their slaves the going market wage for their services or released them when they'd made enough money.

Of course a poor man could buy his way out - that's what the working prisons are for!

Like what? "If you hadn't hurt somebody, you wouldn't be here."?

You've taken just about every single thing I've said out of context and at face value and offered little more than derisive comments or vacuous homilies in counter.

Panth, before we get into the inevitable shitstorm of nit-pickery I sense coming, allow me to ask you a question.

What is your most basic, fundamental reason for not wanting a libertarian society?

[GordonR]

New internet rule, in the spirit of Godwin's Law:

When someone advocates  reinstating slavery as a means of criminal punishment, then the argument is over, and every piece of subsequent nonsense they have to say on the subject can be safely disregarded.