Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Mr Bill wrote:I call it and Eye for and Eye.
And not very productive at that.
That state NEVER has the authority to execute people.
And by your logic there Noumenon, a duel tot he death is perfectly acceptable.
Daovonnaex wrote:and there was ALWAYS an observer/coordinator to ensure that the duel was conducted honorably and was consensual.
Additionally, duels were rarely, if ever, secret affairs. If someone simply killed a man and claimed it was a consensual duel, that would certainly be questionable, and the next-of-kin to the deceased (or, in the case that he had no relatives, the state) would have grounds to investigate.
Noumenon wrote:I have no problem with eye for an eye. If someone tries to kill me, I'll try to kill them first. Its what he deserves, don't you agree?
No, I don't agree. Consider: if a murderer has killed two or more people, how can you satisfy both parties? Wouldn't you need to kill the murderer twice to make sure that the equavilant property damage is done to him as is done to those he killed? Obviuisly that cannot be done, so rather, fines could be attributed his estate by the families of the berieved. But, if the murderer specified in his will that the property should go to *his* families, do you not have two conflicting issues?
Steven_K wrote:Couldn't you kill someone, get some hazy legal forms, and claim it was a consentual duel? Or would a libertarian society actually have to waste the money and resoures of creating buerocracy to run them?
Noumenon wrote:If this hadn't happened, I think we would still have a limited, semi-libertarian society. It is still possible, but the people have to first adopt libertarian ideals and be willing to defend them.
Mr Bill wrote:Noumenon wrote:If this hadn't happened, I think we would still have a limited, semi-libertarian society. It is still possible, but the people have to first adopt libertarian ideals and be willing to defend them.
Doesn't the abandonment of Socilaist ideals and the re-acceptance of Libertarain ideals act in a manner counter to the supposed "American brotherhood" theory which ties all Americans together in their struggle for liberty/freedom/civil rights? That *is* a united movement, how could it ever have sucseeded by following libertarian goals?
@FiveofSwords Why are you so keen to fuck your[…]
So many people are fretting about legitimacy and […]
The genocidal quotes may have come from before Oc[…]