i don't know very much about it but recall from school that saxon and viking
societies used to have blood money payments for crimes. similarly i believe
that a payment to the victims family can be sufficient within the islamic
code providing that family agrees the sum.

a self regulating solution? i believe there were also other penalties if
terms could not be agreed.

david

----- Original Message -----
From: "Francois-Rene Rideau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 11:25 AM
Subject: monopoly justice vs free market justice


> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 01:54:22PM -0800, Fred Foldvary wrote:
> > --- Eric Crampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> While we're at it, why don't we make it illegal for people to kill each
> >> other.  If it were illegal, with stiff fines, we'd surely get rid of
> >> murder.
> >
> > Do you deny that we have less murder with laws penalizing it than if we
had
> > no such laws?
> >
> > If so, do you wish to eliminate all criminal codes?
> >
> I don't know about Eric, but I definitely think that
> there would be less murders if there were no laws against them,
> and similarly for robbery, rape, fraud, etc.
> Crimes would instead be settled in civil courts,
> and murderers would be greatly indebted to the heirs,
> and the fact of criminals paying back their debt
> would make the whole process economically efficient.
>
> Someone who would refuse to accept responsibility for his deeds,
> one who would deny facts established in courts, refuse to pay one's debts,
> or one who would indulge in killing again,
> this someone would be at war with all the peace-loving members of society,
> and one would promptly be a casualty of that war.
> If one knows one has killing urges, and does not want war,
> one oneself will find a warrant, i.e. a specialized insurance company,
> who will accept public responsibility for one not doing anything wrong
again,
> thus preventing war. The warrant might keep one under tight guard,
> keep one in a jail (but then would be responsible for crimes committed
> within the jail, too), etc., and be ready to pay any new debt
> one would contract as well as help one pay his current debt.
> In any case, it would be responsible before its customers, the convicts,
> who themselves would be responsible before their victims.
> Everyone would have interest in making the convicts as productive as
possible
> (not cleaning roads, but learning real jobs and making real money),
> instead of humiliating them and turning them into hardened criminals.
> There would be no "punishment". The whole penal "justice" system
> is actually a school of crime, paid with tax money.
>
> http://www.liberalia.com/htm/cm_criminals_punished.htm
>
> [ Fran�ois-Ren� �VB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics |
http://fare.tunes.org ]
> [  TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System  |
http://tunes.org  ]
> Toleration is not about believing that stupid people are intelligent,
> it's about letting stupid people be victims of their own stupidity
> rather than being victims of yours.
>

Reply via email to