Harland,

 

To paraphrase Lysander Spooner, if the government has a moral imperative to
indemnify individuals against loss at the hands of another, why do you stop
with auto insurance? All individuals should be required to carry no less
than several million in umbrella liability insurance that covers any
foreseeable liability. 

 

Cory

 

 

 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Harland Harrison
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 8:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re : Re : [Libertarian] "Without Due Process..."

 

  

Sasan,

Libertarians should consider the best way to assure Due Process. Clearly,
the US government does a poor job. US citizens, educated in government
schools, might not even understand the concept. But the current failure does
not prove that abolishing the court system, or trying to create a free
market in punishment, would necessarily improve justice in the US. In fact,
I believe that the courts are the last stand of freedom in the country. 

Certainly, a US jury would uphold a mandatory vehicle insurance law.
Actually, I approve of mandatory liability insurance for automobiles,
myself. If I drive into a crowd of pedestrians, who will compensate the
victims or their families? Liability insurance guarantees that accident
victims have compensation. Why should Libertarians oppose that?

If the public roads were private enterprises, the owners, would be liable
for injuries on their property. The road owners would either require
insurance, or charge a high fee for a "driver's license" which included the
insurance. Then they would post reasonable speed limits, and kick everybody
off who drove any faster than the limit. The owners of the roads would have
to take these steps because accident victims could sue them for damages.

The government, however, owns the roads, but the government does not allow
accident victims to sue it. Government speed limits are a joke. Thousands
die every year. The best we can expect, is that drivers carry insurance for
accidents that might happen. Private owners would do exactly that. The
government should guarantee that victims receive compensation, even if the
government does not accept responsibility for the hazards it creates.

Harland Harrison
LP of San Mateo County CA





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to