Saturday, May 19, 2007

May 19_2007 – Final Thoughts and Observations (for Now) on Peace and Order without Police

Once the State law-enforcement monopoly is destroyed, and the inadequate State protection of person and property is no longer forced upon us, each ex-citizen will have the opportunity to consume protection services according to his own tastes and preferences. If he is a risk-lover, he may reduce his expenditures on protection services far below that level which he was forced to pay implicitly through taxation. If the risk-lover's estimate of the risk he faces and the competitive market's estimate are the same, he may even demand no protection services at all! However, most people exhibit risk-averse behavior, particularly when faced with large-loss, small-payoff risks. Since non-purchase of protection services can be thought of as such a risk, we thus expect risk-averse persons to exhibit an effective demand for protection services.” Order Without Law: Where Will Anarchists Keep the Madmen?

by John D. Sneed

I have insurance and an alarm system on my business premises that notifies a security company or the villages's (volunteer) fire & rescue department as well as myself, if there's a problem. And that's it; that's the whole extent of my need for security and safety services. I pay for it all and it's customized just how I want it. Anything more I don't want, don't need and can't/won't use. What additional protection will having Deputies or a Village Police force give me in exchange for much higher taxes and way-less personal liberty? I can't see any. If my neighbor has expired tabs on the license plates on his boat trailer, what's it to me? If I drive down to Ohio to buy a few cartons of cheap cigarettes for myself and bring a few back for my friends, who gets “hurt” by it? Nobody but the state tax collectors. But if there are cops, and they now find out about it or discover it in the course of their “normal duties”, they'll “care” and big time, too.

And please don't give me any of that “obedience to the law is freedom” BS either, cuz I don't buy that. Obedience to a law you didn't write, ratify, or otherwise agree to, (or even know about at all), isn't “freedom” in any sense of the term, period.

Technorati Tags:

1 comment:

zrated said...

there is no freedom in "law" one way or the other. the only justice is to be found in the prosecution of property offenses. law is unnecessary at best.