On the roads in Libertarian Land

The Druids Grove combined Off Topic Forum. Politics, science, random oddities - discuss them all here. - Low Moderation
Fyyr
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:32 am

Re: On the roads in Libertarian Land

Post by Fyyr » Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:50 am

nm, on that post

I bet even the Vikings have helmet laws now. But at least they have horns.

erianaiel
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 2:33 am

Re: On the roads in Libertarian Land

Post by erianaiel » Sat Jan 08, 2011 2:05 pm

Fyyr wrote:
Zute wrote:It might as well be the anarchy Libertarians love.
A society can have a peaceful Anarchy, or at least with only a few laws needed for peaceful social interaction.

If you harm another, the punishment should be so severe as to not be irresponsible in the first place.

scary list of proposed punishment snipped

Sounds like you should move to Afghanistan, or Iraq. They have no government worth mentioning and even fewer laws worth mentioning. They have adopted the criminal code system you are proposing, that if you kill enough people for minor or imaginary slights there are not enough people left to bother about.

Urgh.

In the past I did not always agree with your arguments Fyyr, and on more than occasion felt your debating style was a little out of line, but lately you have crossed into repugnant territory for me :(


Eri
(and severe, even horrifying, punishments have never stopped crime in the past when it was still common to torture people to death, in public, for things we now consider petty crimes. It only increased the level of violence. Criminals do not expect to be caught so the severity of the punishment does not have the expected deterring effect)

User avatar
Tudamorf
Posts: 369
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:45 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: On the roads in Libertarian Land

Post by Tudamorf » Sat Jan 08, 2011 5:29 pm

Fyyr wrote:A society can have a peaceful Anarchy, or at least with only a few laws needed for peaceful social interaction.

If you harm another, the punishment should be so severe as to not be irresponsible in the first place.

It would cut down on a lot of real crime. Make the rest of us freer.

You would virtually wipe out every civil law in existence. Half the law is gone right there.
Hardly.

For example, if you commit fraud and get 100 lashings, what about compensation for the victims?

You need laws that also set things right, in addition to just punishing people to fulfill your blood lust.

You also assume deterrence works. It doesn't (except as to people who aren't dangerous anyway), and the reduction in crime in California has nothing to do with Three Strikes but is consistent an overall reduction in crime nationwide.

You're only arguing for a restructuring of penalties, not a fundamental change in the system.

Fyyr
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:32 am

Re: On the roads in Libertarian Land

Post by Fyyr » Tue Jan 11, 2011 9:42 pm

Deterrence does work.

The crime stats prove it.
California crime dropped dramatically, in California, when 3 strikes was invoked.
Same when carry concealed laws were changed in Florida and Texas.

All three of those prove that deterrence does work.

Compensation? Take all of his or her assets, sell them, and divide them among the victims.
After the lashings.

"You're only arguing for a restructuring of penalties, not a fundamental change in the system."
If you make the consequences equal or worse than the crime, then crime would drop off dramatically.
That is a fundamental change from what we have now.

I mean, how many Bernie Madoffs or Kenneth Lay's would there be if they were going to get lashed, and all of there stuff taken for committing their frauds? Kenneth Lay died while on a ski trip after he was convicted. There is just something fundamentally wrong with that. Not that he died, but that he was able to go skiing after he was found guilty.

User avatar
Tudamorf
Posts: 369
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:45 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: On the roads in Libertarian Land

Post by Tudamorf » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:23 pm

Fyyr wrote:Deterrence does work.

The crime stats prove it.
California crime dropped dramatically, in California, when 3 strikes was invoked.
Correlation does not prove causation.

Crime has dropped nationwide in the past couple of decades, even in states with no three strikes laws.

"Three strikes" is just another prison industry stimulus program, like the "War on Drugs".

Deterrence doesn't work with criminals because they never think they will get caught. And the few who do think that, probably are smart enough to commit their crimes without getting caught.
Fyyr wrote:If you make the consequences equal or worse than the crime, then crime would drop off dramatically.
Right now you can go to prison for decades for a simple, victimless, consensual sale of a harmless drug that nets you only a very small profit.

The consequence is about a million times worse than the crime.

Yet people still do it, day in and day out, as a matter of course.

In countries where you can be executed for it, they still do it.

Deterrence does NOT work.
Fyyr wrote:I mean, how many Bernie Madoffs or Kenneth Lay's would there be if they were going to get lashed, and all of there stuff taken for committing their frauds?
Many.

Post Reply