Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Father Terrence who wrote (51633)	8/16/1999 3:09:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

But if a society allowed individuals to protect themselves, their loved ones and their property, then a police force would be necessary only for forensic and detective work. Isn't this an experiment that failed in the West? There everybody was allowed to carry weapons. But the citizens soon realized that those who were better at using weapons and had little conscience about using them would take over. The citizens hired law officers to represent the community interest. Seems that your theory was tried and rejected there. In some public housing projects in the past decade or two there was a pretty good example of what happens when there is no police force. Guns in those areas were easy enough to get. But the gangs took control, babies and childen were sleeping in bathtubs, and even the police were afraid to venture in. If there is no community law enforcement, there is no functioning law other than the law of the jungle. If I decide that I covet my neighbor's house, what is to stop me from using my gun to kill him while he is gardening in his backyard, taking over the house, and killing anybody who tries to take it away from me? I think history has shown that your theory doesn't work in practice. Do you know of any civilized society that has functioned for any significant time under your proposal?