Taking the Law Into Your Own Hands

From: J
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2017 10:35 AM
To: walter block
Subject: Contract killing in response to previous murder
Hello, Dr. Block. I thought of a scenario that I’d like your take on. Here it is: Suppose Person A was murdered by Person B. Person A’s family or heirs know that B is guilty, since they witnessed the crime firsthand. Would the family of Person A have the right to contract with Person C to kill Person B in retribution? Now suppose that the family of Person A merely suspect Person B, but they don’t have firsthand evidence of Person B’s guilt. What would be the family’s rights then? Or suppose that Person B confesses to the family of Person A. What would be the family’s rights then? You may go ahead and repost this message without my name or email address. J.

Dear J: It depends. Take just the first case. B is guilty for sure. If a family member of person A, or, C kills B, there are risks. B’s family might take umbrage. So might a stranger, seeing A or C killing B, and now knowing the background. Under minarchism, C should be a government policeman. What about under anarcho-capitalism? There is still, even here, such a thing as specialization and division of labor. If C is a uniformed private policeman, that would be ok. If not, there might well be the sort of trouble I mention above. Of course, under ancap, there would still be “do it yourself” activities, whether in plumbing, carpentry, or, police work. It is just that it is usually safer to hire an expert. This is the best case scenario for meting out justice to B, and even here one must tread carefully. In the other examples dealing with B on the part of A’s family or a non private policeman C, would be even less justified. Here is a bibliography of libertarian punishment theory, some of which is relevant to your query:

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block26.html
(15th floor flagpole)

Block, Walter. 2004A. Austrian Law and Economics: The Contributions of Adolf Reinach and Murray Rothbard, Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, Vol. 7, No. 4, Winter, pp. 69-85

Block, Walter. 2004B. “Reply to Frank van Dun’s ‘Natural Law and the Jurisprudence of Freedom,’” Journal of Libertarian Studies. Vol. 18, No. 2, Spring, pp. 65-72.

Block, Walter. 2006. “Radical Libertarianism: Applying Libertarian Principles to Dealing with the Unjust Government, Part II” Reason Papers, Vol. 28, Spring, pp. 85-109; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/block_radical-libertarianism-rp.pdf;

Block, Walter. 2009A. “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Guilt and Punishment for the Crime of Statism” in Hulsmann, Jorg Guido and Stephan Kinsella, eds., Property, Freedom and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute, pp. 137-148; http://mises.org/books/hulsmann-kinsella_property-freedom-society-2009.pdf;
http://mises.org/books/property_freedom_society_kinsella.pdf; festschrift

Block, Walter. 2009B. “Libertarian punishment theory: working for, and donating to, the state” Libertarian Papers, Vol. 1; http://libertarianpapers.org/2009/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-for-and-donating-to-the-state/

Block, Walter E. 2011. “Rejoinder to Kinsella and Tinsley on Incitement, Causation, Aggression and Praxeology” Journal of Libertarian Studies; Vol. 22, pp. 641–664; http://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_32.pdf
http://www.constitution.org/cb/crim_pun.htm. Beccaria’s _Of Crimes and Punishments_

1. Two teeth for a tooth:: proportionality:: punishment:::

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block26.html

Block, 1999, 2002-2003, 2003A, 2003B, 2004A, 2004B, 2006, 2009A, 2009B, 2011; Block, Barnett and Callahan, 2005; Gregory and Block, 2007; Kinsella, 1996; Morris, 1968; Nozick, 1981, pp. 363-373; Olson, 1979; Rothbard, 1998, 88; Whitehead and Block, 2003

Block, Walter. 1999. “Market Inalienability Once Again: Reply to Radin,” Thomas Jefferson Law Journal, Vol. 22, No. 1, Fall, pp. 37-88; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/market_inalienability.pdf;

Block, Walter. 2002-2003. “Berman on Blackmail: Taking Motives Fervently,” Florida State University Business Review, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 57-114

Block, Walter. 2003A. “Libertarianism vs. Objectivism; A Response to Peter Schwartz,” Reason Papers, Vol. 26, Summer, pp. 39-62

Block, Walter. 2003B. “The Non Aggression Axiom of Libertarianism,” February 17; http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block26.html
(15th floor flagpole)

Block, Walter. 2004a. Austrian Law and Economics: The Contributions of Adolf Reinach and Murray Rothbard, Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, Vol. 7, No. 4, Winter, pp. 69-85

Block, Walter. 2004b. “Reply to Frank van Dun’s ‘Natural Law and the Jurisprudence of Freedom,’” Journal of Libertarian Studies. Vol. 18, No. 2, Spring, pp. 65-72.

Block, Walter E. 2009A. “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Guilt and Punishment for the Crime of Statism” in Hulsmann, Jorg Guido and Stephan Kinsella, eds., Property, Freedom and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute, pp. 137-148; http://mises.org/books/hulsmann-kinsella_property-freedom-society-2009.pdf

Block, Walter E., William Barnett II and Gene Callahan. 2005. “The Paradox of Coase as a Defender of Free Markets,” NYU Journal of Law & Liberty, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 1075-1095; http://tinyurl.com/2hbzd4

Kinsella, Stephen. 1996. “Punishment and Proportionality: the Estoppel Approach,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 12, No. 1, Spring, pp. 51-74; http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/12_1/12_1_3.pdf

Morris, Herbert. 1968. “Persons and Punishment.” The Monist. Volume 52, Issue 4: October, pp. 475 – 501; http://www.law-lib.utoronto.ca/bclc/crimweb/bboard/personsandpunishment.pdf

Nozick, Robert. 1981. Philosophical Explanations, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Olson, Charles B. 1979. “Law in Anarchy.” Libertarian Forum. Vol. XII, No. 6, November-December, p. 4; http://64.233.167.104/u/Mises?q=cache:gFT18_ZusWoJ:www.mises.org/journals/lf/1979/1979_11-12.pdf+two+teeth+for+a+tooth&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Rothbard, Murray N. 1998. The Ethics of Liberty, New York: New York University Press. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/ethics/ethics.asp;

In the view of Rothbard (1998, p. 88, ft. 6): “It should be evident that our theory of proportional punishment—that people may be punished by losing their rights to the extent that they have invaded the rights of others—is frankly a retributive theory of punishment, a ‘tooth (or two teeth) for a tooth’ theory. Retribution is in bad repute among philosophers, who generally dismiss the concept quickly as ‘primitive’ or ‘barbaric’ and then race on to a discussion of the two other major theories of punishment: deterrence and rehabilitation. But simply to dismiss a concept as ‘barbaric’ can hardly suffice; after all, it is possible that in this case, the ‘barbarians’ hit on a concept that was superior to the more modern creeds.”

Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 2003. “Taking the assets of the criminal to compensate victims of violence: a legal and philosophical approach,” Wayne State University Law School Journal of Law in Society Vol. 5, No. 1, Fall, pp.229-254

Block, 2009A, 2009B; Kinsella, 1996, 1997; Olson, 1979; Rothbard, 1977, 1998; Whitehead and Block, 2003

Kinsella, Stephan. 1997. “A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights,” 30 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 607-45

Rothbard, Murray N. 1977. “Punishment and Proportionality.” R. E. Barnett and J. Hagel, III (eds.), Assessing the Criminal: Restitution, Retribution, and the Legal Process. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Co., pp. 259 270.

Rothbard, Murray N. 1998 The Ethics of Liberty, New York: New York University Press. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/ethics/ethics.asp;

Attempts:: attempted crime

Kinsella, 1996, 68-69, 2006, 2009A, 2009B

Kinsella, Stephen. 2006. “The Problem with “Fraud”: Fraud, Threat, and Contract Breach as Types of Aggression.” July 17; http://blog.mises.org/5327/the-problem-with-fraud-fraud-threat-and-contract-breach-as-types-of-aggression/

Kinsella, Stephen. 2009A. Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach.” February 3; http://blog.mises.org/9367/fraud-restitution-and-retaliation-the-libertarian-approach/

Kinsella, Stephen. 2009B. “The Libertarian Approach to Negligence, Tort, and Strict Liability: Wergeld and Partial Wergeld.” September 1; http://blog.mises.org/10572/the-libertarian-approach-to-negligence-tort-and-strict-liability-wergeld-and-partial-wergeld/

http://www.wired.com/business/2013/03/ipo-man

Block, 1999, 2002-2003, 2003, 2004a, 2004b, 2006, 2009A, 2009B; Block, Barnett and Callahan, 2005; Gregory and Block, 2007; Olson, 1979; Rothbard, 1998, 88; Whitehead and Block, 2003;

Block, Walter. 2002-2003. “Berman on Blackmail: Taking Motives Fervently,” Florida State University Business Review, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 57-114

Block, Walter. 2003. “Libertarianism vs. Objectivism; A Response to Peter Schwartz,” Reason Papers, Vol. 26, Summer, pp. 39-62

Block, Walter. 2004a. Austrian Law and Economics: The Contributions of Adolf Reinach and Murray Rothbard, Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, Vol. 7, No. 4, Winter, pp. 69-85

Block, Walter. 2004b. “Reply to Frank van Dun’s ‘Natural Law and the Jurisprudence of Freedom,’” Journal of Libertarian Studies. Vol. 18, No. 2, Spring, pp. 65-72.

Gregory, Anthony and Walter E. Block. 2007. “On Immigration: Reply to Hoppe.” Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 21, No. 3, Fall, pp. 25-42; http://mises.org/journals/jls/21_3/21_3_2.pdf

Rothbard, Murray N. 1998 The Ethics of Liberty, New York: New York University Press. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/ethics/ethics.asp
p. 88, ft. 6:
It should be evident that our theory of proportional punishment—that people may be punished by losing their rights to the extent that they have invaded the rights of others—is frankly a retributive theory of punishment, a “tooth (or two teeth) for a tooth” theory.[12] Retribution is in bad repute among philosophers, who generally dismiss the concept quickly as “primitive” or “barbaric” and then race on to a discussion of the two other major theories of punishment: deterrence and rehabilitation. But simply to dismiss a concept as “barbaric” can hardly suffice; after all, it is possible that in this case, the “barbarians” hit on a concept that was superior to the more modern creeds.

Taking the Law Into Your Own Hands

Political Theatre

Analyses of Charlie Kirk Assassination Preliminary Hearing

The true importance of a senatorial position?

“Start Spreadin’ the News”: New York Losing Billions as Millionaires Flee the Big Apple

The Great Inoculation: How mRNA Vaccines Guarantee Longevity Will Decline

UK Government Announces Mass Stockpile Order

LRC Blog

Kushner And Witkoff: Diplomats Or Shady ‘Deal-Makers’?

Lindsey Graham To Be Suitably ‘Honored’ By Senate

Hiding The Cost Of The Iran War From The American People

Trump Is Now The Biggest Threat To The United States (Here’s Why)

Electoral Prognostications with Robert Barnes and Rich Baris — What do the Current Midterm Forecasts Project for the U.S. House? Plus, Explaining the Impact of War and Economy on Electoral Outcomes, and More!