There’s this blog on LRC here, where Bill Anderson complains about commenters approving of the police beating in Burmingham here. Of course, LRC had a different stance way back. What’s the proper libertarian position?
Police brutality is good because I like getting my ass beat to death.
Seriously I didn’t realize there was any debate on this issue.
I want to make a smartass comment about this… but I won’t.
Oh well, this is why I never endeavour to be a public intellectual. Too many things I regret.
Wow! Talk about bad reading comprehension. In that article, Lew DID NOT advocate “police brutality”; instead, he merely pointed out the correlation of… read the end of the article. And taking Lew’s point to its logical extension, he is pointing the failure of the state (government) to keep us safe.
The article’s nearly 20 years old. Seriously. Get a hobby.
Shoot the messenger eh ?
If I get a hobby, where would I find the time to write forum posts linking to 20 yo articles? Anyway, what’s you’re answer to the OP?
Regarding the 20 yo article by Lew - we all mature in our thinking and expression, at least we hope so. Fortunately for me, my opinions of that same time period are not in the public record.
The real question is, “What is the proper libertarian position about state police?” Most, not all, libertarians would say that they are opposed to such an entity. So, at that point the question is moot, the police are only a violent criminal gang, and it follows that abuse is illegal, immoral, etc.
Those libertarians who support the existance of such an entity would clearly all the same be opposed to brutality by the same. It is a clear violation of the principle of non-aggression.
Greg
Police officers are just providing a service that’s been monopolized by the state, there’s no reason to dislike them any more than there’s reason to dislike doctors or even members of the army. If they need to be brutal in their line of work, then so be it, their brutality should be regarded as the same as that of any other citizen.