We may agree that a practical limit on the level of danger of actions will be imposed. But I cannot agree that that limit will apply to nuclear weapons or plants. Perhaps some hardon collider thing could qualify, but right now I cannot think of nay uber-dangerous. Again, if nuclear plant are deemed too dangerous, so should hydro plants, chemical factories, airports and a host of other structures. Are we willing to go that far?
So yes, ideally I think a practical limit will exist, but right now no such limit can be justified, to my mind.
you are falling in a trap here. you are no longer worried about the principle of the topic, but the consequence. I am not Rothbardian, but I am assuming you are because of the name you have chosen for the forum, and I say if you abandon the principle here and look at the consequences, well then you are contradicting yourself as a Rothbardian.
What’s wrong with demanding that if you decide to own property that can potentially harm the properties of people around you, that you will ask their permission first? After all it is their property that can be potentially affected.
What wrong? Easy, we’re departing for a very basic legal concept: you cannot be guilty of something you have not done. If you keep me with force from building X on my land because it could potentially harm others, you’re punishing me for something I have not done, and may never do.
Along these lines, we’d be indeed justified in using force against drinkers, druggers, those viewing pornography, ect. Heck, along these lines if we can find even a single statistically significant link between playing cards and raping, we’d have to ban playing cards! Hitler would have never dared, but we do!
Again, I agree that the arbitration market would come up with breaches to the NAP for very high risk structures. What I do not agree is that a single such structure exists nowadays. If we think nuclear plant are high risk, we’re turning our society into one of static existence to rival the middle ages.
But these ar eall speculations: we’ll have to wait for the actual arbitration market to settle the issue.
I think David Friedman writes about that. Essentially, if you have nukes in your garage you can’t get any arbitration agency to cover you, and anyone will likely deny you access to their roads and malls if you have no arbitration agency. Or something like that. Anyways, there’s some free market solution to that problem.