Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Justice in a Free Society

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    So I've noticed on this board (and others) that there is a contingent of people who believe most felons should be executed. I wonder why these people trust the legal system so much? This is the same government that shot a boy in the back and a nursing mother in the head in Idaho for a piece of steel they said was to short.

    The same government which burned down a church (even if it isn't my religion, I know the First Amendment applies to them too). Then to cover their asses they cry 'child abuse' allegations, which the local sheriff denied.

    This is the government that is trying to disarm us.

    And here we have some people that are willing to turn over the very power of life and death to these people! I would like to invite you to read an article I wrote about another why to have a system of justice. I'm not asking you to agree or sign on, just think.

    ---------------

    Common Law Justice: A Freemarket approach.

    I would consider myself a "philosophical anarchist," as I don't believe any man has the right to rule over another; nor can one man represent any but himself.

    However, a true anarchy requires a moral and ethical, and above all: a well-educated people. Since this is unlikely to occur in the near future, I will support the most limited form of government possible, and always work at decreasing the scope of that government.

    Although that's my philosophy, my politics tend to divide things up this way: Authoritarian <---> Libertarian; i.e. who uses forces to enforce their ideas on others? I'm a voluntarist, I don't believe that it is moral to force someone to do something they do not want to do. All associations should be voluntary. This precludes some basic notions on government, such as taxes, fines, levies, etc.

    I like the common law system of justice, where there aren't "punishments" per se, for crimes; as the collective use of force in any means other than defense is always wrong.

    There are three basic Laws of Common Law:
    - Do not injure another human in his or her life, liberty, or lawfully acquired property,
    - Do not unlawfully posses the lawfully acquired property of another,
    - Do not contract in fraud.

    This covers all the bases, and anything else, is nanny-state mentality.

    So, if you are charged with a crime, let's say horse-stealing, and the common law court, made up of people from your community and the community of the victim, finds you guilty.

    They decide adequate repayment is required. You are asked to return the horse, and help the man from whom you stole do whatever the job of the horse was for 2 months without pay; so that you understand the value of what you took, and the loss with which the victim dealt. If you agree, then sentence is carried out, and everyone goes home happy.

    If you disagree, you won't be forced to do these things; not by Police or Bailiffs, or any group, but you will labeled an outlaw. That means, that since you disrespected the Rights of another, your Rights will no longer be protected by the community or by the Law.

    You are outside the system of law. So, if the man from whom you stole comes to collect his horse with 15 of his buddies, and the price of the labor he lost in your hide: so be it. No crime can be committed, since you are outside the scope of the law.

    If he decides to let it go, so be it. But, if a year from now, someone steals from you, then no crime has been committed, since the Law does not protect/respect you. Or, if someone kills you, the same is true. No crime.

    If you want to be protected by the Law, you must in turn protect it.

    It's not a light decision by any means, but in has in it reform, punishment, and it dissuades people from infringing on the Rights of others.

    If, however, you decide after a few months, that living this way is not good, and you want to make remunerations, then the court reconvenes. You give back the horse, work the two months, plus some extra sentence for the delay of justice; and after it's all been worked out, then the community opens its arms to you and you are welcomed back in; and your Rights are again protected by the Law and by the community.

    This is a "free-market" form of justice, which appeals to me a lot. I think the smaller the governing structure, the better. I want my servant governors to have to live with me, trade with me, count on my trade and goodwill. They need to know what life's like for the people their decisions effect. They need to be subject to those same consequences.

    It's a voluntary association. You don't have to be a part of it. It's not about the control of territory or land or jurisdiction. It's in the minds and hearts of the people.

    So, what would happen if instead of having to fight a horrid bloody conflict to be left alone by the men and women who sit in the seats of Washington, doing business as the United States of America; what if instead we simply began to live and behave, and institute our own forms of self-governance?

    Our greatest weapon just might be ignoring them, and going on about our lives as Freemen and Freewomen. Think about it.

    --- Kevin Patrick

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Off-topic, but good post.

    Interesting discussion of justice from the voluntaryist perspective.

    I've often wondered how so many people who fear so much from government (here, gun-grabbing) all of a sudden turn around and demand that government wield the power to execute people for "felonies". How can you be so distrustful over small issues (not that gun-grabbing is itself a trivial issue), and then be so trusting when it comes to the power over life and death?

    I've said it a million times: I have no ethical qualm with the execution of murderers etc. I simply don't trust our government (or any government) to carry out such executions. And I never will.

    Anybody who trusts government that much is a Statist -- whether they care to admit it or not.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    Similarly, I have wondered why there is such support for LEOs when they are the ones starting trouble with us, and they are the ones who will try one day, to confiscate our guns.

    We should be disarming the government.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    stainless1911 wrote:
    We should be disarming the government.
    +∞

  5. #5
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    stainless1911 wrote:
    Similarly, I have wondered why there is such support for LEOs when they are the ones starting trouble with us, and they are the ones who will try one day, to confiscate our guns.

    We should be disarming the government.
    That was what was originally intended. By the "founding fathers".

    I agree too, I am no opponent of the death penalty but over the past year have definitely had a change of heart about our penal/judicial system being the folks to do it.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  6. #6
    Regular Member Old Grump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Blue River, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    Life for heinous crimes yes, execution no, can't take back a mistake and its cheaper by a bunch to maintain a felon for life than it is to execute. Can't take back 20 years of wrongful imprisonment either but at least there is a chance the victim of our sometimes errant legal system can still have a life and die a free man.

    Note I said legal system not justice system. Contrary to what most people believe we do not have a justice system we have a system based on law and that by definition is a legal system. Not perfect but better than a lot of places I can name.

    Now its up to us to change the unconstitutional system in place and get our natural rights back, namely rescind every anti-gun law since the enactment of the NFA. Armed society is a politer society and I have a feeling that the question of legal executions won't be such a hot topic.
    Roman Catholic, Life Member of American Legion, VFW, Wisconsin Libertarian party, Wi-FORCE, WGO, NRA, JPFO, GOA, SAF and CCRKBA

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    inkster, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    150

    Post imported post

    in most cases i agree with you. but there are times when you hear about a 5 time child molester being convicted for the 6th time. i just wounder if there should be a death penalty for this

  8. #8
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    khicks wrote:
    in most cases i agree with you. but there are times when you hear about a 5 time child molester being convicted for the 6th time. i just wounder if there should be a death penalty for this
    Oh they should be killed just not by our government.

    In Wenatchee, Washington several folks were locked up for what appeared to be continual child molestation. Ended up to be all a lie and the pyschologist helped in it.

    I know someone who were in jail with one of these folks, and hes said he got some horrible treatment in prison. Even criminals detest child molesters. But he was innocent.

    http://www.onpointlegal.com/InsightO...tcheeWatch.htm
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  9. #9
    Regular Member NY2AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    75

    Post imported post

    Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the reason is party lines. because someone agrees with many of a candidate's, or a party's philosophies, they will settle with blindly agreeing with all of their philosophies and policies.

    This is of course, simply an idea. I could be wrong. On a similar note. The only time I would support capita punishment would be in a case of treason; and only when and if it were a unanimous decision by a grand jury.
    If ever you find yourself in a situation where you can't be safe, be violent!

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    Or you could be locked in a room for 24 hours with the friends and family of the person you hurt...


  11. #11
    Newbie crisisweasel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Pima County, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    Off-topic, but good post.

    Interesting discussion of justice from the voluntaryist perspective.

    I've often wondered how so many people who fear so much from government (here, gun-grabbing) all of a sudden turn around and demand that government wield the power to execute people for "felonies". How can you be so distrustful over small issues (not that gun-grabbing is itself a trivial issue), and then be so trusting when it comes to the power over life and death?

    I've said it a million times: I have no ethical qualm with the execution of murderers etc. I simply don't trust our government (or any government) to carry out such executions. And I never will.

    Anybody who trusts government that much is a Statist -- whether they care to admit it or not.
    It is good to hear this, and I am glad I am not the only one who thinks this way.

    It is not and has never been about sympathy for the guilty. It is distrust of the state and the refusal to empower it with life and death this way...how long before the state starts framing its enemies to dispose of them through the justice system?

    I bet it's happened already.

    I was a strong advocate of the death penalty until a certain day in 1991.

    That was the day I also declared myself a libertarian.

    I would also note that when you put emotional desire for vengeance aside, capital punishment has not been shown to be a deterrent either, nor particularly cost effective.

    With so many possible negative consequences of empowering the state this way, and so positives other than this vague sense of justice being served, I can see no reason to support capital punishment.

    You also have innocent people being convicted (amazing how many people who ranted about the stupidity of the OJ Simpson trial jury will say they trust juries to convict someone of a crime they could be sentenced to death for).

    Increasingly we are also going to see more and more people fleeing the country to places which will not extradite fugitives for "human rights concerns."

    It's just a major net negative all around.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    I absolutely agree completely with your assessment, of course.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •