tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post114593389332470400..comments2024-02-29T03:34:23.190-05:00Comments on Who Were the Sea Peoples?: Molyneux on Stateless Prisonsgcallahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-1146675284317193942006-05-03T12:54:00.000-04:002006-05-03T12:54:00.000-04:00Systems like this have existed (e.g., Anglo-Saxon ...Systems like this <EM>have</EM> existed (e.g., Anglo-Saxon common law), and, in fact, Bob is right about how they play out. Private law systems never, as far as I know, incorporate long-term imprisonment.gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-1146276824447156822006-04-28T22:13:00.000-04:002006-04-28T22:13:00.000-04:00The reason I included a fine and a prison sentence...<I>The reason I included a fine and a prison sentence is because if only a fine were involved, then a very rich person could just go on a crime spree and continue paying the fines.</I><BR/><BR/>Well, I don't think this is really a good way to approach the issue. I don't think our job as an-cap theorists is to say, "What kind of world do I want to live in? How would people then need to be in order to generate my vision?"<BR/><BR/>Instead, I think we should just try to predict what would unfold if private property weren't institutionally violated (by State). I think that it would indeed be possible for a very rich person to literally get away with murder, if "get away with" means not going to jail.<BR/><BR/>By the same token, a very rich person right now can get away with buying mansions and burning them to the ground--but you don't read about this too often in the newspaper.<BR/><BR/>I've actually <A HREF="http://www.strike-the-root.com/columns/Murphy/murphy1.html" REL="nofollow">written</A> about this type of fear at Strike The Root. (It's the 2nd half of the article, where I talk about Bill Gates shooting dinner guests for fun, and how the system would easily adapt to that.)<BR/><BR/><I>I think that a crime victim might well prefer to have more money for dropping the charges, but remember that the DRO also represents many other potential victims, and that is why incarceration for certain crimes would be beneficial. If the DRO lets a mugger go free, than he or she will just go and mug more people, which will cost the DRO more than the price of incarceration and so on.</I><BR/><BR/>OK, so would doctors who botch operations pay the malpractice fines and go to jail as well? After all if you just let a surgeon get away with paying millions of dollars (as specified in the contract) to the family of someone who died on his table, then he'd be free to do the same to somebody else.<BR/><BR/>(My point of course is that the fine is the deterrent. Other people wouldn't want to be victimized, but they would still get paid off as contractually specified. It's the same thing with your mugger.)Bob Murphyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04001108408649311528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-1145974260304298602006-04-25T10:11:00.000-04:002006-04-25T10:11:00.000-04:00Excellent points Bob - here are my humble response...Excellent points Bob - here are my humble responses.<BR/><BR/>This is actually the first time I've used 'rape' as an example, but I think it is helpful, since it is more complicated than theft, and less complicated than murder.<BR/><BR/>Certainly I may well have gone too far in creating punishments, but if that is a criticism then we are probably agreeing far more than disagreeing. We have decided that the transaction is worthwhile - now we are just haggling on price! The reason I included a fine and a prison sentence is because if only a fine were involved, then a very rich person could just go on a crime spree and continue paying the fines.<BR/><BR/>I think that a crime victim might well prefer to have more money for dropping the charges, but remember that the DRO also represents many other potential victims, and that is why incarceration for certain crimes would be beneficial. If the DRO lets a mugger go free, than he or she will just go and mug more people, which will cost the DRO more than the price of incarceration and so on.<BR/><BR/>Does that make sense?<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the feedback!Stefan Molyneuxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11898315223778903374noreply@blogger.com