Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!testa-j@osu-20@ohio-state.arpa From: testa-j@osu-20@ohio-state.arpa Newsgroups: mod.politics Subject: The Cost of Justice, and more Message-ID: <12234058154.49.MCGREW@RED.RUTGERS.EDU> Date: Wed, 27-Aug-86 01:28:35 EDT Article-I.D.: RED.12234058154.49.MCGREW Posted: Wed Aug 27 01:28:35 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 27-Aug-86 21:20:10 EDT Sender: kjd@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: testa-j@osu-20@ohio-state.arpa Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 67 Approved: poli-sci@red.rutgers.edu From: "Keith F. Lynch" >Much of crime is due to repeat criminals. If someone has served >two major felony sentences and is convicted of a third, he should >be put away for good. Finally :-), something we agree completely on. >[the justice system in a libertarian system] will cost less than, >say, the restoration of the Statue of Liberty. The latter was paid >for entirely by voluntary donations. And I think anyone willing to >pay for a statue representing our way of life would be willing to pay >at least as much to guarantee the way of life itself. I think that the success of the restoration of the Statue was mainly due to the hoopla and media attention given to the project. It was made to be *exciting*, an *event* that one "had" to participate in. I can't see such excitement being generated by a fund to pay to run a court; after all, courts make unpopular but constitutional decisions -- such as defending First Amendment rights. If a court has to rely on voluntary contributions, then might it not feel compelled to make popular but unjust decisions? I suppose that is my basic problem with libertarianism -- i don't share your confidence that people will volunteer funds to support vital government functions. Even though these functions benefit potentially everyone, people won't contribute unless it's for an "exciting" cause. And convincing people to contribute drains resources. A similar situation exists with the health-care industry today. In Ohio, we are flooded with commercials on TV showing us pictures of helicopters flying around particular hospitals. This is a waste of money; it doesn't cure a single disease; if they spent their time and money on health care, perhaps the cost wouldn't be so high. The same would go for a judicial system, only much worse. I want judges to be honest arbiters, not concerned with slick advertising techniques and public opinion polls. And from another message: > Opponents of libertarian philosophy often bring up stories in which >the population does not consist of rational adults, but of children, >feebleminded people, criminals, insane people, or people in a sinking >lifeboat. Do we really want a system which treats everyone as if >they were like that? Is that the most realistic view of the people >of this country? No, but SOME people ARE like that! Would the libertarian system ensure their protection? Or would they just get run over in the mad rush of everyone looking out for him/her self, ripe for exploitation by those who are more clever or intelligent or sane or rich than they are? -joe testa - [ Another point on the Statue of Liberty project is that it had a definite ending point. People have visible proof of their contribution. The courts go on and on, and there is no end of the cases they would have to hear. I suspect that the futility felt by not a few policemen would soon be felt by many potential contributors to Keith's proposed justice system. - CWM] -------