decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
If you take the American argument seriously | 397 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
If you take the American argument seriously
Authored by: odysseus on Sunday, November 18 2012 @ 05:07 PM EST
No, it's different to that, the argument is that it should all be paid for
directly to private market providers: private police, private fire engines,
private roads, etc. If you can't afford it, then tough luck. Of course, they
tried that back in the 1800's and found that it didn't work due to network
effects and corruption. Some things just are more efficiently done by a central
government.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

If you take the American argument seriously
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 18 2012 @ 08:48 PM EST
>* No police (you should protect yourself)

Under the United States Constitution, Law Enforcement is not required to protect
an individual, even if the officer directly witnesses the crime being committed,
and is present at the scene. (I've forgotten the case law, but several new
cases are added each year, because individuals don't realize that neither law
enforcement, nor 911, nor E911 are legally allowed to prevent, or investigate
any criminal activity, except in extremely specific instances, and even then,
only for those who occupy very specific positions of power.

> * No fire department (you are responsible for putting out fires)

I guess you did not know that for most of the United States, the local fire
department is run by volunteers.

Nor do you appear to know that fire brigades were originally run by insurance
companies, as a way of maximizing their profit.

>* No armed forces (you are responsible for defending the country)

The hardest country to conquer, is the country in which the ground troops have
to fight from house to house, praying that they haven't missed anybody who can
use a rifle, during their advance.

Remember why the Japanese didn't invade the lower 48 states of the United
States. Also remember why the Japanese Army selected Alaska as the first state
to invade. (Well back then it wasn't a state, but the point still stands.)

>* No roads

Roads would be privately owned. Odds are, if they connect towns, or cross major
natural barriers, there will be a toll. The overwhelming majority of privately
owned roads in the United States today, can be traversed gratis.
FWIW, the number of privately owned roads in the United States increased
steadily, until the mortgage bust of 2008.

>* No border patrol

The issue that New Mexico and Arizona have, is that the Border Patrol point
blank refuses to do that. Individuals in those states would be much better off,
if they could execute trespassers on the spot.

>* No citizenship

Citizenship is a contractual obligation between the state and the individual. In
theory, it should be mutually beneficial. In practice, as thousands of
Jordanian citizens will testify, citizenship is meaningless, when one can not
fulfill the obligations that such citizenship imposes. Likewise, the State of
Jordan serves as the poster child of what happens when the state refuses to meet
the obligations to its citizens, that the contract imposes upon it.

* No courts

Masonic Jurisprudence pretty much demonstrates why government courts are not
needed. Beth Din, Canon Law, and Sharia Law pretty much underscore that
demonstration.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )