Comments on: On Smuggling and Law http://cafehayek.com/2008/05/on-smuggling-an.html where orders emerge Mon, 16 Jan 2012 02:06:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: No prescription percocet. http://cafehayek.com/2008/05/on-smuggling-an.html/comment-page-1#comment-55911 No prescription percocet. Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:36:44 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=3283#comment-55911 <strong>How long is percocet in your system....</strong> Percocet. Side effects of percocet. Generic percocet.... How long is percocet in your system….

Percocet. Side effects of percocet. Generic percocet….

]]> By: brotio http://cafehayek.com/2008/05/on-smuggling-an.html/comment-page-1#comment-25521 brotio Wed, 07 May 2008 00:26:24 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=3283#comment-25521 <p>"I wasn't making any comments about the 2nd Amednment rather I was saying Libertarians unsderstand force can be a good thing." - Gil</p> <p>I misunderstood you. My apologies.</p> "I wasn't making any comments about the 2nd Amednment rather I was saying Libertarians unsderstand force can be a good thing." – Gil

I misunderstood you. My apologies.

]]> By: I_am_a_lead_pencil http://cafehayek.com/2008/05/on-smuggling-an.html/comment-page-1#comment-25520 I_am_a_lead_pencil Tue, 06 May 2008 11:36:58 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=3283#comment-25520 <p>Gil,</p> <p>My hypothetical does not allow for a plan B. </p> <p>Given that, how would you argue for the property in contention? </p> <p>I'm open to argument and quite capable of being swayed.</p> Gil,

My hypothetical does not allow for a plan B.

Given that, how would you argue for the property in contention?

I'm open to argument and quite capable of being swayed.

]]> By: Gil http://cafehayek.com/2008/05/on-smuggling-an.html/comment-page-1#comment-25519 Gil Tue, 06 May 2008 11:17:36 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=3283#comment-25519 <p>But isn't the point IAALP that the potential to summon defensive force is the Plan B required when others don't respect your property? Sure if everyone respected your property then no defense would be required. But seriously, one group of people has been displaced by another more powerful group time and time again throughout history. I believe MB may be saying that a great deal of force is going still legitimately exist in a Libertarian society. I'm sure many a Libertarian has complained they're not Pacifists.</p> But isn't the point IAALP that the potential to summon defensive force is the Plan B required when others don't respect your property? Sure if everyone respected your property then no defense would be required. But seriously, one group of people has been displaced by another more powerful group time and time again throughout history. I believe MB may be saying that a great deal of force is going still legitimately exist in a Libertarian society. I'm sure many a Libertarian has complained they're not Pacifists.

]]> By: I_am_a_lead_pencil http://cafehayek.com/2008/05/on-smuggling-an.html/comment-page-1#comment-25518 I_am_a_lead_pencil Tue, 06 May 2008 10:59:49 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=3283#comment-25518 <p>Martin said:</p> <p>"Propriety is the will of armed men, for better or for worse, not the will of Nature."</p> <p>Lets try a hypothetical.</p> <p>Assumptions:</p> <p>1. There are no institutions. There are no governments or private institutional frameworks to enforce or adjudicate anything. </p> <p>2. You cannot use physical force.</p> <p>3. I've made a claim to a piece of property that you now very much desire.</p> <p>On what basis will you attempt to convince me that I should relinquish my claim and allow you to use the property?</p> <p>We are removing coercion and attempting to solve the problem of human cooperation through rational persuasion only. We are removing bestial man and replacing him with rational man. </p> <p>What would you argue?<br /> </p> Martin said:

"Propriety is the will of armed men, for better or for worse, not the will of Nature."

Lets try a hypothetical.

Assumptions:

1. There are no institutions. There are no governments or private institutional frameworks to enforce or adjudicate anything.

2. You cannot use physical force.

3. I've made a claim to a piece of property that you now very much desire.

On what basis will you attempt to convince me that I should relinquish my claim and allow you to use the property?

We are removing coercion and attempting to solve the problem of human cooperation through rational persuasion only. We are removing bestial man and replacing him with rational man.

What would you argue?

]]>