[LooseCaller]

[ QUOTE ]
The ideal situation, then, puts the criminal frankly into a state of enslavement to his victim, the criminal continuing in that condition of just slavery until he has redressed the grievance of the man he has wronged

Sort of like, there's a guy who causes an auto accident, has no insurance, so the judge sentences him to be the other guy's butler. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

edit: Sorry, had to do that. This is actually a very interesting thread, but the suggestion of Seinfeld the anarcho-capitalist was too hard to resist.

[/ QUOTE ]

i am somewhat confused as how putting someone into forced labor is different from prison. assuming the person doesnt want to do this he would:
a)probably do a bad job
b)make attempts to avoid work or run away

this would require heavy policing of his activities both on and off the job. an ankle bracelet would probably work to some extent, but there would need to be on-the-job supervision to ensure that actually performed the tasks assigned to him. and what happens if he just says "[censored] it, i dont want to do this." eventually you're going to encounter increasing resistance by the criminals to this punishment system, which will in turn lead to increased control of the the criminals by the authorities and i dont see how this doesnt eventually wind up with him in a heavily guarded building making license plates.

and since you need to fund the supervision in some way, where is the money coming from? the victims who were supposed to be recompensed? does this then mean that the criminals have to work off their debt+x, where x is the overhead of monitoring them? admittedly this provides some incentive to play along and do a job, but i still think the idea, given time in the marketplace, would still devolve into a prison that earns some money for the victims.

unless of course this is something you are fine with. i just mean, logistically, i dont think it would be that different.