This reminded me of this recent thread: Fact/Value Dichotomy? - #2 by Phi_est_aureum
I understand, and mostly, if not wholly (I’ll need to ponder it further to be sure) agree with what you’re saying. I think the issue that will arise is the definition of the NAP. I think, but could be making a wrong assumption, that most believe that since the initiation of force is immoral, that they can justify using force against the initiator. However, since “justice is subjective,” to the person onthe receiving end o the “justice,” it can look like revenge, and thus, a new initiation of force. I’m not sure if what I’m trying to get at is at all clear…
Property rights (and natural rights) can be maintained when a different interpretation of the implications of the NAP is followed. That is, the initiation of force is never justified, and the only force that MAY be justified is defense in the face of aggression. So, for example, if someone is actively engaging you in an attempt to kill you, you MAY be justified in using force to stop the aggressor. However, once he has stopped, whether he succeeded in murdering you or not, yfreedom anyone else is justified in attempting to restrict his freedom, be it with jail or any other sentence. To do so would be viewed as a new initiation of force, and obviously, unjustified according to the NAP.
Of course, this view may be preferred to be used only on the subject of moral philosophy, as opposed to market philosophy. Obviously people may not be happy that a burglar could steal your television when your not home, and then not be punished. According to this other view of the NAP, the only way to get around this would be to implement a state. It could be a voluntary state. Yet, only if people consent that force is justified in certain circumstances could the robbed be assured of the return of their property.
Essentially, the state (even a voluntary one) hands out justice in a more human-based time-preference, and thus serves to displace God, who hands out the proper, objective justice though not necessarily on a human-based but a “cosmic” time-preference.
Again, I reiterate that this is merely an opinion, and one on such an interesting topic that I’ll need to consider this at further length to find more about my position, but this is my initial reaction and initial thoughts.