The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Punishments in a libertarian society

rated by 0 users
This post has 82 Replies | 8 Followers

Top 75 Contributor
Posts 436
Points 14,155
alimentarius Posted: Mon, Aug 24 2009 9:27 PM

What should the penalties be for the following:

Murder

Theft (invading a home or a bank robbery)

Rape

Drunk driving

Violating speed limits (say 70 mph when the limit is 50)

Blind violence  (e. g.knocking someone down in a bar)

Abortion

I think abortion is justified until the fetus has developed a functioning nerval , and brain. Do libertarians agree, or do they following the Christians, claiming that their potential to become conscious human beings, gives them rights?

And I hope you don't approve of capital punishment? Or do you think that should be up to each state to decide?

  • | Post Points: 80
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 37
Points 1,050

Murder: 30 Bulls and 15 goats, plus an oath of tribal allegiance.

Theft: Whatever was stolen plus eight cows.

Rape: Rape the rapist plus a guarantee of his youngest daughter's hand in marriage.

Drunk Driving: The offender must play as a contestant in "The Running Man"

Violating the Speed Limit: $1,000 fine for every mph over the limit.

Blind Violence: 100 goats, a sacrifice to Moloch, and 10 minutes in the pit of death with the minotaur.

Abortion: 100 days repentance in the public square.

 

 

 

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 37
Points 1,050

And in my opinion, yes, killing a murderer is just.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,814
Points 50,100
Moderator

Brutus 2.0:
The offender must play as a contestant in "The Running Man"

Now we just need a Captain Freedom...hmmm

'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Female
Posts 118
Points 1,670
marquise replied on Mon, Aug 24 2009 10:25 PM

alimentarius:
Abortion

And why should abortion be punished?!?

I need no warrant for being, and no word of sanction upon my being. I am the warrant and the sanction. ~ Ayn Rand

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Female
Posts 118
Points 1,670
marquise replied on Mon, Aug 24 2009 10:29 PM

Lol

I need no warrant for being, and no word of sanction upon my being. I am the warrant and the sanction. ~ Ayn Rand

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,174
Points 24,320
Moderator

alimentarius:
Murder

Bullet through the head.

 

alimentarius:
Theft (invading a home or a bank robbery)

Bullet through the head.

 

alimentarius:
Rape

Bullet through the head.

 

alimentarius:
Drunk driving

Bullet through the head.

 

alimentarius:
Violating speed limits (say 70 mph when the limit is 50)

Bullet through the head.

 

alimentarius:
Blind violence  (e. g.knocking someone down in a bar)

Bullet through the head.

 

alimentarius:
Abortion

Bullet through the head.

 

On a serious note, I don't think that societies, and legal punishments are created in such a manner that men will sit down, and decide punishments for crimes as they see fit; rather, punishments will be set through precidents, and legal trial, and error.

I am becoming a Burkean Whig.

          - F.A. Hayek

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 37
Points 1,050
Brutus 2.0 replied on Mon, Aug 24 2009 11:31 PM

I can also certainly say how these crimes would not be punished: Putting the offender in jail to sit around for 30 years and rot, doing nothing productive.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 7,643
Points 132,750
MVP
SystemAdministrator

Brutus 2.0:

I can also certainly say how these crimes would not be punished: Putting the offender in jail to sit around for 30 years and rot, doing nothing productive.

And who would pay for them to be in prison, the victim?

Only a statist would consider that "justice".

If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,174
Points 24,320
Moderator

Brutus 2.0:
I can also certainly say how these crimes would not be punished: Putting the offender in jail to sit around for 30 years and rot, doing nothing productive.

How can you rule out such a possibility?

I am becoming a Burkean Whig.

          - F.A. Hayek

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 37
Points 1,050
Brutus 2.0 replied on Mon, Aug 24 2009 11:48 PM

I can't, but I can say that it would not be the standard way of doing things.  It wouldn't be the default.  In fact, it would have to be some kind of bizarre circumstance in which that would happen.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,174
Points 24,320
Moderator

Brutus 2.0:
I can't, but I can say that it would not be the standard way of doing things.  It wouldn't be the default.  In fact, it would have to be some kind of bizarre circumstance in which that would happen.

So, essentially, your entire statement is a conjecture without any substantial foundation?

I am becoming a Burkean Whig.

          - F.A. Hayek

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Male
Posts 150
Points 2,125
alimentarius:

And I hope you don't approve of capital punishment? Or do you think that should be up to each state to decide?

I'm ignoring the rest of your post and addressing this specifically because it's likely to be the most contentious part of it. I agree with capital punishment on principle - someone who commits murder is effectively saying that the victim has no right to live, and thus it's fitting if the murderer were deprived of the same right. That said, human beings are incredibly fallible, and, no matter what standard of evidence is used in a murder trial, there is always the possibility of error. I don't believe that the justice system should allow for the possibility of an innocent person to be killed as some sort of collateral damage. At least with a life sentence (or similar punishment), there is always the chance for some small redemption if a convict is later found to be innocent.

I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 37
Points 1,050
Brutus 2.0 replied on Tue, Aug 25 2009 12:26 AM

My foundation is the following:

In a system of private law and arbitration, and where restitution to the victim is the primary focus of legal action, locking a guy up in prison is not an effective way to do that.  It is difficult to pay a victim back when you're in prison doing nothing.  It is, on the face of it, completely uneconomical.  This is not to say that it would never happen.  However, under a system of private law, I do not think it is a likely scenario.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 436
Points 14,155

What is the answer when critics claim that libertarians are brainwashed non-pragmatic non-consequentialist crackpots who only want freedom for themselves and those who follow their own semi-religious system, where the property right is God?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,352
Points 23,910
Byzantine replied on Tue, Aug 25 2009 8:58 AM

This is another in a long line of "what about roads????!!!!!" threads but I can't help myself:

In a free society, all punishment would be corporal, capital or financial.  For most crimes, the focus would be on restitution and it would be a matter of subrogation between insurers.  Sociopathic individuals would not be insurable and, in effect, outside the protection of the law.  There would be very few of the gruesome "stranger-murder" cases by pure human predators since a free society would not be burdened with welfare and anti-discrimination laws; sociopaths would be driven into exile or shot summarily.  Since nobody would be willing to pay the costs of adjudicating the issue of a sociopath's murder, it would be ignored.

Manslaughter would largely be a matter of restitution to the victim's family, who may simply be satisfied with a genuine act of contrition.  Most crimes would be handled this way.

Most 'crimes' today are either not crimes in any ethical sense or they are de minimis incidents that used to be handled with a lecture and maybe a kick in the butt by a beat cop.  Bar fights, domestic disputes, petty theft, disorderly conduct, etc. can all be dealt with in other ways.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,352
Points 23,910
Byzantine replied on Tue, Aug 25 2009 9:02 AM

Brutus 2.0:
In a system of private law and arbitration, and where restitution to the victim is the primary focus of legal action, locking a guy up in prison is not an effective way to do that.  It is difficult to pay a victim back when you're in prison doing nothing.  It is, on the face of it, completely uneconomical.  This is not to say that it would never happen.  However, under a system of private law, I do not think it is a likely scenario.

Surely you are forgetting the legions of progressivists who would be willing to keep criminals safe and well-fed in their own homes rather than exposed to retribution from victims' families.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,814
Points 50,100
Moderator

Byzantine:
Surely you are forgetting the legions of progressivists who would be willing to keep criminals safe and well-fed in their own homes rather than exposed to retribution from victims' families.

Sorry we're too busy with the legions of conservatives who are making 'criminals' out of people who commit vicitimless crime like drugs, pornography, prostitution and talking about the the human reproductive organs in public...ok I made the last one up but someone's probably thought about it.

'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,352
Points 23,910
Byzantine replied on Tue, Aug 25 2009 9:22 AM

Having to pay the freight for implementation of progressivist viewpoints generally cures one of them so, as with sociopaths, there would be very few progressivists in a free society.  BTW, prohibition is a progressivist idea.  When there were red light districts and people drank beer with breakfast and bought opium, society was much more conservative.

Also, in a free society rude talk would be punished by a punch in the face, and there would be no state around to protect your precious 'freedom of speech.'

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,814
Points 50,100
Moderator

Byzantine:
BTW, prohibition is a progressivist idea. 

Right, 'Progressive' Post-Millenialist Yankees.

Byzantine:
Also, in a free society rude talk would be punished by a punch in the face, and there would be no state around to protect your precious 'freedom of speech.'

Well there is a wonderful violation of the NAP. I say 'penis' you get to punch me in the face.

'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition

  • | Post Points: 20
Page 1 of 5 (83 items) 1 2 3 4 5 Next > | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap