At 11:05 PM 2/6/96 EDT, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:

From: IN%"ravage@ssz.com" "Jim Choate" 6-FEB-1996 22:50:35.24

...

What is described is not self-defence by any stretch of the imagination. It is a pre-meditated act which causes any plea of self-defence to fail.

---

If someone has comitted serious enough violations of rights in the past, then I would call killing that person justified. First, it prevents any future violations of rights by that person. Second, it serves to discourage people if they know they can get killed if they do so. (I realize that capital punishment by governments doesn't appear to do much good, but the people in question- government agents, etcetera- are generally a bit different than the gang members who so regularly ignore prison sentences and the death penalty.) Third, and getting away from the self-defense argument, it is justice. The job of a government, if it has one, is to defend individual liberties. It is given privileges in order to enforce that. The abuse of such privileges should be met by death. (Yes, I would be in favor of changing current laws to remove sovereign immunity and institute a death penalty for governmental rights violations. Unfortunately, among the people subject to such a law are the ones making the laws.)

Thank you for such a well-written defense of my philosophy. Clearly, the government is now out of effective control of the citizenry; it is hard for me to understand how anybody could fail to see this. The system I describe, while it may appear to some to be extreme, is a sincere attempt to return control to the populace.

------------------------

...

How many people have to decide that another should be killed for it to be ethical? In short, how many people does it take to decide it is a legitimate act to take your own life?

---

Why should "how many people" make a difference? If I violate someone's rights enough to justify such a course of action, then I should be dead even if everyone except the victim is cheering. Yes, I realize that Jim Bell's system does depend on a group of people. But so, in the end, do all such systems- whether they call themselves governments or anarcho-capitalist societies. If the Christian Coalition got too many people with guns in the latter, they'd rule. Any further discussion would appear to belong in private email; I suspect that Jim Bell would appreciate a cc. -Allen

Yes, please. Frankly, Allen, it's a pleasure to see people really UNDERSTAND what I'm talking about! You obviously do, better than mos t.