If I were to characterize the *average* libertarian on crime it would go like this:
1) All crime is due to drug laws and if drugs were legalized there would be zero crime.
2) Cops and the government are a way bigger threat to liberty than criminals, and this we should side in the interests of the accused and civil liberties to the absolute…
If I were to characterize the *average* libertarian on crime it would go like this:
1) All crime is due to drug laws and if drugs were legalized there would be zero crime.
2) Cops and the government are a way bigger threat to liberty than criminals, and this we should side in the interests of the accused and civil liberties to the absolute maximum amount. So current levels of support for accused rights or more.
I think the perspective of Arnold is that both those premises are flawed. Drug laws aren't the sole or even in many cases the main cause of crime. And a case could easily be made that post warren court rights for the accused, let alone current blue city non-policing norms, are an ineffective balances of the rights of the accused versus public safety.
"1) All crime is due to drug laws and if drugs were legalized there would be zero crime.”
This is certainly a straw man. I can’t imagine any person smart enough to be libertarian saying such a dumb thing, much less the average libertarian. On what do you base this characterization?
One would think someone of his intellect would criticize Steel Man, not Average Man. Reading his work on crime and drugs, I also don't see him weighing multiple factors dispassionately, but rather letting one article, opinion, or event tweak his three internal Platonic axes. Often that one article, opinion, or event doubles as a one-dimensional way to confirm the resulting new priors. Here's an example: https://arnoldkling.substack.com/p/marijuana-reconsidered
Negative effect of legalization detected! Reduce the freedom dial! Increase the civilization dial!
Average Man defines the "movement" and its marginal impact on public policy.
In the case of crime policy, I would say the average man I noted above isn't even far off from the average think tank libertarian, at least historically.
If I were to characterize the *average* libertarian on crime it would go like this:
1) All crime is due to drug laws and if drugs were legalized there would be zero crime.
2) Cops and the government are a way bigger threat to liberty than criminals, and this we should side in the interests of the accused and civil liberties to the absolute maximum amount. So current levels of support for accused rights or more.
I think the perspective of Arnold is that both those premises are flawed. Drug laws aren't the sole or even in many cases the main cause of crime. And a case could easily be made that post warren court rights for the accused, let alone current blue city non-policing norms, are an ineffective balances of the rights of the accused versus public safety.
"1) All crime is due to drug laws and if drugs were legalized there would be zero crime.”
This is certainly a straw man. I can’t imagine any person smart enough to be libertarian saying such a dumb thing, much less the average libertarian. On what do you base this characterization?
One would think someone of his intellect would criticize Steel Man, not Average Man. Reading his work on crime and drugs, I also don't see him weighing multiple factors dispassionately, but rather letting one article, opinion, or event tweak his three internal Platonic axes. Often that one article, opinion, or event doubles as a one-dimensional way to confirm the resulting new priors. Here's an example: https://arnoldkling.substack.com/p/marijuana-reconsidered
Negative effect of legalization detected! Reduce the freedom dial! Increase the civilization dial!
Average Man defines the "movement" and its marginal impact on public policy.
In the case of crime policy, I would say the average man I noted above isn't even far off from the average think tank libertarian, at least historically.
I can’t argue with that assessment, sadly. There is no one more unimaginative than the average libertarian think-tanker.