Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Make arbitration an aspect of the market, just like everything else should be.

[/ QUOTE ]

K, but what's your preference in a market trial? Arbitrator who fields juries? Or one who doesn't?

[/ QUOTE ]


I have no meaningful way to express my preference, because it's a monopoly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Personal attack deleted poofler is trying to ask if you would prefer an arbitration firm to have a single arbitrator, multiple arbitrators,a jury, a combination of the above, etc, not whether you want it state run or not.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

I hear ya nielsio, but really, you can theorize about what would make the state system not as bad. There are shades of gray. There is a difference between getting punched in the arm and having your eyes gouged out.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hear ya nielsio, but really, you can theorize about what would make the state system not as bad. There are shades of gray. There is a difference between getting punched in the arm and having your eyes gouged out.

[/ QUOTE ]


And then what? So we can write a letter to the editor? Write our congressman? All of that is nothing but a suggestion box for slaves. People who violently hold a monopoly are *not interested in helping people*. Don't further the myth that they do.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hear ya nielsio, but really, you can theorize about what would make the state system not as bad. There are shades of gray. There is a difference between getting punched in the arm and having your eyes gouged out.

[/ QUOTE ]


And then what? So we can write a letter to the editor? Write our congressman? All of that is nothing but a suggestion box for slaves. People who violently hold a monopoly are *not interested in helping people*. Don't further the myth that they do.

[/ QUOTE ]


I understand. Politicians are vote maximizers, that is their raison d'etre. Ron Paul seeming to be the notable exception, given his voting record.

I understand that the only way to a stateless society is through the widespread understanding that the existence of the state is wrong.

However, I will not cut off my nose to spite my face. I fully intend to vote libertarian (or Republican if Paul gets the nomination (I know that he won't) because I happen to think that that is a step in the right direction! If the state were reduced significantly because either of these parties won, many many peoples lives would be improved greatly and I hope the logical thought would be that maybe they should go one step further.

What we're dealing with here are realistically extremely improbable, I'm just trying to strategically maximize the chance of it occurring.

ALSO, even if it never gets there, I sure as hell would rather have Ron Paul as president (or to a lesser extent whoever actually is on the republican ticket) than that vicious communist Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

Bad question without proposing an alternative IMO.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bad question without proposing an alternative IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
If abolish, what would you rather see?

[/ QUOTE ]
That was your job, champ.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hear ya nielsio, but really, you can theorize about what would make the state system not as bad. There are shades of gray. There is a difference between getting punched in the arm and having your eyes gouged out.

[/ QUOTE ]


And then what? So we can write a letter to the editor? Write our congressman? All of that is nothing but a suggestion box for slaves. People who violently hold a monopoly are *not interested in helping people*. Don't further the myth that they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Step outside the must-make-sure-people-know-they-are-slaves box for just one second. This question doesn't have to exist only in the current state.

Suppose you, Nielsio, are walking around Ancapistan. Someone aggressed against you, and you guys are agreeing upon an arbitrator. Do you think you'd prefer an arbitrator who fields a jury to render a verdict? Or some other means? Or you don't have an opinion?

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Make arbitration an aspect of the market, just like everything else should be.

[/ QUOTE ]

K, but what's your preference in a market trial? Arbitrator who fields juries? Or one who doesn't?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no meaningful way to express my preference, because it's a monopoly.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the most pathetic AC hijack yet.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Suppose you, Nielsio, are walking around Ancapistan. Someone aggressed against you, and you guys are agreeing upon an arbitrator. Do you think you'd prefer an arbitrator who fields a jury to render a verdict? Or some other means?

[/ QUOTE ]

Those details would probably have to be agreed upon before the incident occurred, unless you advocate "forced relations" under such circumstances.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bad question without proposing an alternative IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
If abolish, what would you rather see?

[/ QUOTE ]
That was your job, champ.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh???????? This makes it a good,wothwhile question, poll?

Anyway, if jury nullification was done away with in this country, I'd be shipping out immediately.