3 ms·

It's a fair point, but they do have a unique form of monopoly on violence. They can "legitimately" initiate violence. Initiate the violence. Don't pay your p

It's a fair point, but they do have a unique form of monopoly on violence. They can "legitimately" initiate violence. Initiate the violence. Don't pay your property taxes, and ignore summons, etc? Eventually someone will show up at your door to toss you out of your house. If you just sit on your couch and say "nuh huh" eventually they will violently throw you out. If you use self defense to stop the violence, they'll simply kill you or incapacitate you. Grow a funny plant in the wrong state? Eventually, if they find out, men with guns will bust into your house. They won't be 'self-defending' you into your custody, they will be initiating the violence against you to take you. While self defense is 'violence' I think a lot of us just almost "don't count it." Self defense is more like stopping the violence, IMO.

_-david-_ 4y ago
Self defense can include stopping somebody from taking your property (maybe not every state?) This is comparable to not paying taxes. The taxes are legitimately owed to the government and so you have "stolen" from the government. Similar to stealing from an individual (in a sense). You may not be a fan of killing over stolen property, but depending on the situation and state it is completely allowed. I think some states even allow you to kill a person who stole something from you while they are running away. This means the initiation of physical violence can be initiated by you as well and be considered just. Laws regarding weed are more nuanced, but it doesn't change that individuals can under certain circumstances initiate physical violence towards somebody legitimately.
- notch656a 4y ago
  I concede you're right. It's not a complete monopoly. My state would allow a citizen's arrest for felony theft, for instance. Generally killing someone over property is illegal, absent some unique circumstances (like breaking into an occupied structure). I'm not aware of any state that allows you to use violence to collect on a contract, however. IF you see taxes as satisfaction of the social contract or whatever. It's hard for me to argue failure to pay taxes as theft; I'd call it more of failure to pay for an involuntary contract. IMO it would be much more appropriately be classified as a civil offense than a criminal one.

_-david-_ 4y ago

Self defense can include stopping somebody from taking your property (maybe not every state?) This is comparable to not paying taxes. The taxes are legitimately owed to the government and so you have "stolen" from the government. Similar to stealing from an individual (in a sense). You may not be a fan of killing over stolen property, but depending on the situation and state it is completely allowed. I think some states even allow you to kill a person who stole something from you while they are running away. This means the initiation of physical violence can be initiated by you as well and be considered just. Laws regarding weed are more nuanced, but it doesn't change that individuals can under certain circumstances initiate physical violence towards somebody legitimately.

notch656a 4y ago
I concede you're right. It's not a complete monopoly. My state would allow a citizen's arrest for felony theft, for instance. Generally killing someone over property is illegal, absent some unique circumstances (like breaking into an occupied structure). I'm not aware of any state that allows you to use violence to collect on a contract, however. IF you see taxes as satisfaction of the social contract or whatever. It's hard for me to argue failure to pay taxes as theft; I'd call it more of failure to pay for an involuntary contract. IMO it would be much more appropriately be classified as a civil offense than a criminal one.