Sorry you got mugged. But you’re thwacking a straw man you call “libertarian” just when your traditional public police failed, as they consistently do. Arguing from a failure of imagination and incorrect definition doesn’t suit you. Community, even communal, policing is perfectly libertarian.
I'm sorry to hear you got robbed. Like the policeman, I am glad to hear you are ok, FWIW.
"Let’s drop the libertarian pretense, and call the force that provides safety for its constituents a government."
My impression is that libertarianism traditionally endorses policing as a core governmental function, distinguishing it from anarchism. So I don't think the lessons here are really for libertarianism. My uninformed suspicion would be that the governmental authorities around Wheaton are totally comfortable with government, but maybe have neglected the basics.
I've never been a victim of direct physical crime, though I've had my property stolen and destroyed when I wasn't there many many times.
Like a lot of people this owes partially to the fact that I consciously avoid high risk areas and activities, which is itself a cost of crime. One way I judge the crime level of a city is whether its downtown looks like a place of general law and order or not.
People I know that have been the victim of direct physical crime have found it very troubling, even when they are not hurt. Home break-ins in particular seem quite traumatic.
Libertarians seem stuck in the view that the criminal justice system is like The Shawshank Redemption.
P.S. From what I've read about gun ownership it reduces the safety of the gun owner but enhances the safety of the gun owners community (criminals are reluctant to operate in areas with high gun ownership rates, but actual gun ownership leads to accidents and confrontations).
First of all, I am very sorry; the psychological cost of being mugged is always very high. Hard to think on anything else for a while. And of course, government is un-avoidable. But libertarian ideas are extremely useful to build better governments…
Get a pistol, .38 caliber snub nosed automatic, learn how to diassemble and clean and to safely handle. Get a concealed weapon's permit. Go to a gun range for situational training. Talk to others, as you have, but about self defense. This progressive county you live in Maryland is useless. They're going to pretend that this was the first time this ATM was hit or that they couldn't patrol all ATM's? Was the assailant Black? Think about going to the bank during a weekday to make checks payable to cash for cash. I don't know why people use ATM's? Develop situational awareness. Had you had a weapon that you were competent with you could have waited until the assailant started running away and then left him a calling card. For some reason I think of a jingle from a war novel long ago(Leon Uris? ), "This is my rifle, this is my gun(penis). One is for fighting , the other is for fun."
>Let’s drop the libertarian pretense, and call the force that provides safety for its constituents a government.
Let’s drop the philosophical confusion, and call the force that provides safety for its customers a defence agency. It is very odd that someone who is both a libertarian and an economist seems unaware of the economic arguments for the greater efficiency of private protection. However, I shall stick to philosophy and hope that some libertarian economists reply.
in a proper culture if someone transgresses the norms of the culture they are not protected by that society and become an outlaw whom anyone can punish with immunity.
Arnold, do you think the movie "Who Shot Liberty Valance" is relevant to your experience? I do. If you are not familiar with the movie I recommend you watch it. Think of the sheriff as your civic leaders who are cowards who refuse to address the criminal element. Think of you as Stoddard who wants law and order but is personally unable to enforce it against the criminal element. And ask yourself, where are the Donophons who, as uncouth as they are, actually support the Stoddards and provide the "guns" needed to thwart the Liberty Valances.
I too am glad to hear you are OK. I agree with Max that community policing is consistent with libertarianism. But there are free rider problems, as you note. Police frequently assist neighborhoods of households in a neighborhood watch program. The peer pressure might help overcome free riding, but turnover of houses blunts that. With fewer, bigger players, perhaps a smaller group of businesspeople in a district like yours in Wheaton get past the Mancur Olson collective action problem.
Sorry that you were subjected to this injustice but very glad you were unharmed physically. Your column is thoughtful and your policy conclusion IMHO is correct.
Sorry you got mugged. But you’re thwacking a straw man you call “libertarian” just when your traditional public police failed, as they consistently do. Arguing from a failure of imagination and incorrect definition doesn’t suit you. Community, even communal, policing is perfectly libertarian.
I'm sorry to hear you got robbed. Like the policeman, I am glad to hear you are ok, FWIW.
"Let’s drop the libertarian pretense, and call the force that provides safety for its constituents a government."
My impression is that libertarianism traditionally endorses policing as a core governmental function, distinguishing it from anarchism. So I don't think the lessons here are really for libertarianism. My uninformed suspicion would be that the governmental authorities around Wheaton are totally comfortable with government, but maybe have neglected the basics.
I have no insights. I am just sorry to hear you were mugged.
I've never been a victim of direct physical crime, though I've had my property stolen and destroyed when I wasn't there many many times.
Like a lot of people this owes partially to the fact that I consciously avoid high risk areas and activities, which is itself a cost of crime. One way I judge the crime level of a city is whether its downtown looks like a place of general law and order or not.
People I know that have been the victim of direct physical crime have found it very troubling, even when they are not hurt. Home break-ins in particular seem quite traumatic.
Libertarians seem stuck in the view that the criminal justice system is like The Shawshank Redemption.
P.S. From what I've read about gun ownership it reduces the safety of the gun owner but enhances the safety of the gun owners community (criminals are reluctant to operate in areas with high gun ownership rates, but actual gun ownership leads to accidents and confrontations).
Very glad you're all right.
Very sorry to hear about your mugging.
First of all, I am very sorry; the psychological cost of being mugged is always very high. Hard to think on anything else for a while. And of course, government is un-avoidable. But libertarian ideas are extremely useful to build better governments…
I will save the philosophizing for another time. Sorry to hear that that happened to you. Glad to hear you're okay, though.
Get a pistol, .38 caliber snub nosed automatic, learn how to diassemble and clean and to safely handle. Get a concealed weapon's permit. Go to a gun range for situational training. Talk to others, as you have, but about self defense. This progressive county you live in Maryland is useless. They're going to pretend that this was the first time this ATM was hit or that they couldn't patrol all ATM's? Was the assailant Black? Think about going to the bank during a weekday to make checks payable to cash for cash. I don't know why people use ATM's? Develop situational awareness. Had you had a weapon that you were competent with you could have waited until the assailant started running away and then left him a calling card. For some reason I think of a jingle from a war novel long ago(Leon Uris? ), "This is my rifle, this is my gun(penis). One is for fighting , the other is for fun."
>Let’s drop the libertarian pretense, and call the force that provides safety for its constituents a government.
Let’s drop the philosophical confusion, and call the force that provides safety for its customers a defence agency. It is very odd that someone who is both a libertarian and an economist seems unaware of the economic arguments for the greater efficiency of private protection. However, I shall stick to philosophy and hope that some libertarian economists reply.
The advice that J.J. Bittenbinder gave Chicago in the 1990s still works.
https://youtu.be/OdIPlDAXsqg?t=86
in a proper culture if someone transgresses the norms of the culture they are not protected by that society and become an outlaw whom anyone can punish with immunity.
Arnold, do you think the movie "Who Shot Liberty Valance" is relevant to your experience? I do. If you are not familiar with the movie I recommend you watch it. Think of the sheriff as your civic leaders who are cowards who refuse to address the criminal element. Think of you as Stoddard who wants law and order but is personally unable to enforce it against the criminal element. And ask yourself, where are the Donophons who, as uncouth as they are, actually support the Stoddards and provide the "guns" needed to thwart the Liberty Valances.
I too am glad to hear you are OK. I agree with Max that community policing is consistent with libertarianism. But there are free rider problems, as you note. Police frequently assist neighborhoods of households in a neighborhood watch program. The peer pressure might help overcome free riding, but turnover of houses blunts that. With fewer, bigger players, perhaps a smaller group of businesspeople in a district like yours in Wheaton get past the Mancur Olson collective action problem.
Sorry to hear about the robbery. Handing over the cash and starting a dialogue with your neighbors is the right approach. Glad you’re okay.
Sorry that you were subjected to this injustice but very glad you were unharmed physically. Your column is thoughtful and your policy conclusion IMHO is correct.