[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Shooting a gun at someone is a violent act. Flying a plane over someone's land isn't.

[/ QUOTE ]
What if it's a helicopter, meant to intimidate the owner into selling their land to the local monopolist?

The point which all you fine AC intellects are missing is that a million scenarios can be thought of (many of them realistic) where your absolute rights mantra gets shown up as a logical and practical farce.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well mabey you could provide a positive theory of property rights. Or do you just want the government to own everything and control everyone?

The problem with you example and many of the abstract examples that come up is there is no cost to the actors in abstract land. Whos gonna pay for the pilot and helicopter in your example? At some point the owner is going to sell his property and at some point it doesnt make economic sense to do rediculous things. Its when you have the state to externalize the cost of the rediculous things that you want to do that we get massive amounts of violence. Why dont you go have a discussion with those poor people in Iraq about property rights.