Brodaviing Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 Hey folks, I recently came across an archived post on Reddit ( https://www.reddit.com/r/CapitalismVSocialism/comments/4cqnf4/how_would_a_criminal_justice_system_operate_under/ ) This question arose to my mind soon after reading the post: "In a voluntary society, would it be righteous for Justice to be a commodity to be bought and sold?" Justice should be a punishment for those found guilty of doing harm upon another. I would like to argue that an eye for an eye is probably the fairest punishment one can receive. If a thief were to steal property worth $500 and damages your property for another $200, you in your right mind of course want those $700 dollars returned (IE by repairs to your property and the return of the stolen items). This example excludes possible physical or mental damage to the victim. The victim(s) get the total amount of damage done by the perpetrator returned by no-one but the perpetrator for he is responsible for the damage caused to the victim(s). The Incentive to commit a crime must, of course, never be high enough that the benefits of doing harm unto another or their property outweighs the benefits of abstaining criminality. Therefore it must be necessary to make it as hard and un-incentivizing as possible for the criminal to commit a crime. If there was a high chance that your break-in would result in your death, you'd have to be astonishingly dumb or desperate to still commit the crime. Short cost-gain analysis: You have been captured by civilians who hand you over to the Justice department. Cost: By committing the crime you automatically lose any money you could have earned in the time you spent preparing and executing the crime -$120 You have damaged the victims property and therefore you are obliged to pay the reparations -$100 Gain: The goods you stole from your victim have been returned to the victim +$0 Total gain/loss = -$220 I am of the belief that in a free society, spirituality, economics and justice/state should all be separated from each other. We have seen (and still see) what atrocities have been committed if spirituality gets woven into justice/state part of society (see the Jihad). We can also currently observe what happens to economics when Justice/state enters that part of our society (welfare states, socialism, the EU, etc.) Therefore I believe that, if we, the people, were to reform the nation states to ensure that justice and national safety will not influence or be influenced by spirituality or economics, then this would mean that a separation of state and economics is required. If the state may not interfere with economics then the economy should on their part not influence the state. Don't throw a rock at someone if you don't want them to throw one towards you. Now to get into the funding of the Justice/state, I believe this would have to be voluntary just as everything else in society. Since, I am safe to assume, basically everyone wants some sort of protection and form of justice. The Justice system/state will have to prove invaluable to the people, therefore outweighing the benefits of not paying for it's service. Anyway those are my thoughts on the subject, I would take great pleasure in hearing yours. Stay free, Brodaviing
Recommended Posts