From: N
Sent: Wed 5/18/2016 11:31 PM
To: Walter Block
Subject: Taxation/Human Shield Question
A tells B to shoot C otherwise A will shoot B. If I understand your position correctly B has no right to shoot C because B homesteaded the misfortune first. (1)
A tells B to hand A a machine gun so A can shoot C, D, E, etc. Would B have the right to hand over the gun to A to save his own life? (2)
A tells B to give A money so A can buy a tank to kills millions, does B have the right to hand over the money to save himself even though this means A will be able to murder people with the money? (3)
I just thought up this argument against taxation.
In my opinion, cases 2 and 3 are similar, and negative homesteading doesn’t apply to them. we pay taxes (3), hand over guns (2) to bad guys, under duress, and we are not criminals. when B hands over a gun, or pays taxes to A, the bad guy, he is not a criminal, he’s a victim. however, in case 1, if B shoots C, B is a murderer.
Dear N:
I deal with such important questions that you raise here:
Block, Walter E. 2010. “Response to Jakobsson on human body shields.” Libertarian Papers. http://libertarianpapers.org/2010/25-block-response-to-jakobsson-on-human-body-shields/
Block, Walter E. 2011. “The Human Body Shield” Journal of Libertarian Studies; Vol. 22 , pp. 625-630; http://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_30.pdf
Block, Walter E. Forthcoming. “Human shields, missiles, negative homesteading and libertarianism” Ekonomia Wroclaw Economic Review.
2:22 pm on February 18, 2019 Email Walter E. Block
