Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 42 43 [44] 45 46 ... 61 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Nobody Is 100% Libertarian (Read 11916 times)
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8105
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #430 - May 15th, 2018 at 6:55pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on May 15th, 2018 at 6:38pm:
Like almost all libertarians/classical liberals, I say, equally enforced justice is a necessity for civilization to exist.

Vigilante "justice" is for anarchic areas where there is no mechanism to enforce real justice.

Why would a civilized person imagine that arbitrary assassination is just?

So your example with John Wilkes Booth was a bad example?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8104
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #431 - May 15th, 2018 at 11:40pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 15th, 2018 at 12:24pm:
I don't doubt this is true, but a 160 on the Caplan test?

You must have not answered all of the questions honestly. To get a (perfect) score of 160, you would have needed to answer YES to question #61:

Is it morally permissible to exercise "vigilante justice," even against government leaders?

Of course, that's a trick question.  An answer to the affirmative proves one of three things;

1) you are lying

2) you blindly answered yes to all questions to get a perfect score

3) You don't really believe in the NAP and therefore are a LINO (Libertarian In Name Only).


#61 is tricky, because in truth a private court should decide. But I'm almost positive the question intends for a private court itself to be classed as vigilante, since it does not have government approval.

vig·i·lan·te
ˌvijəˈlan(t)ē/
noun
noun: vigilante; plural noun: vigilantes

    a member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate.

Okay... Well... that describes a private court pretty well, doesn't it?

I admit that one gave me trouble. So do the ones about the Federal Reserve. My ultimate choice was due to two things:

1. If the question is in any way nonliteral, it probably means people dispensing justice without government approval are vigilantes, and as long as they are agents of a private court, it's fine.

2. If the question is literal, it does say vigilante, but it also says it's justice. If it is against the NAP for this vigilante to do whatever he's assumed to be doing, then it's not justice, is it?
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36183
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #432 - May 16th, 2018 at 8:10am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 15th, 2018 at 6:55pm:
So your example with John Wilkes Booth was a bad example?
In what way?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36183
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #433 - May 16th, 2018 at 8:21am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on May 15th, 2018 at 11:40pm:
#61 is tricky, because in truth a private court should decide.


1. If the question is in any way nonliteral, it probably means people dispensing justice without government approval are vigilantes, and as long as they are agents of a private court, it's fine.

2. If the question is literal, it does say vigilante, but it also says it's justice. If it is against the NAP for this vigilante to do whatever he's assumed to be doing, then it's not justice, is it?
In the absence of government and law, people will create their own to deal with barbarian behaviors. That is not vigilante justice.

When there is law and a perception that the law has failed to deliver justice, as in that someone widely believed to be a murderer is not arrested and prosecuted because of a lack of evidence, and people take it upon themselves to hang the person anyway, that is "vigilante justice", and the hanging may or may not in fact be just.

There are good reasons to not allow everyone to take the law into their own hands. Mainly that the result is anarchy.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8105
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #434 - May 16th, 2018 at 11:53am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on May 16th, 2018 at 8:10am:
In what way?

Booth assassination of Lincoln wasn't really a "private court", so it wouldn't qualify as "vigilante" justice. Booth was getting even - he wasn't meting out justice on behalf of vigilantes.

Again, here was the question on the quiz:

Is it morally permissible to exercise "vigilante justice," even against government leaders?

You asked if the Lincoln assassination would qualify as "vigilante" justice.   It doesn't, imo.

The Opposition wrote on May 15th, 2018 at 11:40pm:
1. If the question is in any way nonliteral, it probably means people dispensing justice without government approval are vigilantes, and as long as they are agents of a private court, it's fine.

2. If the question is literal, it does say vigilante, but it also says it's justice. If it is against the NAP for this vigilante to do whatever he's assumed to be doing, then it's not justice, is it?

Probably not...  I hadn't considered the hidden implications of the question. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36183
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #435 - May 16th, 2018 at 3:00pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 16th, 2018 at 11:53am:
Booth assassination of Lincoln wasn't really a "private court", so it wouldn't qualify as "vigilante" justice. Booth was getting even - he wasn't meting out justice on behalf of vigilantes.

I didn't realize that at least two vigilantes were required...

As to the "justice" of the act, in Red's eyes it was a just act. Some people are able to see political assassination as justice.

Not all decisions handed down by juries in legitimate courts are just, unfortunately.

The lizard could just as easily say that no justice is done in any court, because they often result in the imprisonment or sanctioned killing of people, which violates his  "pure" interpretation of the NAP.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8105
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #436 - May 16th, 2018 at 3:26pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on May 16th, 2018 at 3:00pm:
I didn't realize that at least two vigilantes were required...

I think the term "group" implies more than one person.  So Booth acting alone does not make the assassination vigilante  (unless he committed the assassination under contract?).

vigilante: a member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority

Jeff wrote on May 16th, 2018 at 3:00pm:
The lizard could just as easily say that no justice is done in any court, because they often result in the imprisonment or sanctioned killing of people, which violates his  "pure" interpretation of the NAP.

Possibly.  Maybe it will clarify.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36183
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #437 - May 16th, 2018 at 3:36pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 16th, 2018 at 3:26pm:
I think the term "group" implies more than one person.  So Booth acting alone does not make the assassination vigilante  (unless he committed the assassination under contract?).

vigilante: a member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority

I'm pretty sure I read that there is fairly good evidence that Booth did not act alone. For the sake of the argument, pretend he was part of a conspiracy of disgruntled Confederate sympathizers.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8104
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #438 - May 17th, 2018 at 2:15am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on May 16th, 2018 at 3:00pm:
Not all decisions handed down by juries in legitimate courts are just, unfortunately.


Correct, but the question assumes the decision is just because it says justice.

This, by the way, is an example of how I could do that niggling crap you constantly do and point out that State courts are illegitimate and only private courts are legitimate, but I know what you mean.

Jeff wrote on May 16th, 2018 at 3:00pm:
The lizard could just as easily say that no justice is done in any court, because they often result in the imprisonment or sanctioned killing of people, which violates his  "pure" interpretation of the NAP.


The question specified that it was justice. If it really is justice (and yeah that's a big, rather ludicrous if), who cares who does it?
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36183
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #439 - May 17th, 2018 at 8:01am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on May 17th, 2018 at 2:15am:
Correct, but the question assumes the decision is just because it says justice.


The question specified that it was justice. If it really is justice (and yeah that's a big, rather ludicrous if), who cares who does it?
As I said, allowing every individual to take "justice" into their own hands results in anarchy.

Saying "vigilante justice" cannot lead to any assumption that what vigilantes might do is necessarily just. Why would it?

Even with careful procedures to protect the rights of accused people such as we are required by law to use in the U.S., justice is not always achieved.

If, in the absence of a duly constituted court, a community formed a "private court" and tried and convicted a person of a capital crime, in order for justice to be done, that person must be allowed a right of appeal in another venue before being executed. Justice demands it.

In frontier situations, ethical people often tried and convicted people of crimes, then held them over for delivery to to government courts so that the alleged criminals rights would be respected.

That wasn't vigilante justice, but if they had a cursory hearing and then hung the suspect, it was vigilante justice.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 42 43 [44] 45 46 ... 61
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy