Outlaws?

Post Reply New Topic

For the benefit of the libertarians amongst us, why not bring in/bring back an 'outlaw' system.

I would restrict this to non-millionaires. It is too easy for millionaires to do this and I'm not 100% convinced they don't already do some version of this.

What it would entail is: You can choose to be an outlaw. You don't have to pay taxes. But you don't get government services for free at the point of access. Want to use our roads? Pay for it. Our police force? Pay for it. Our fire fighters? Pay. Don't want to use any of this? You don't have to pay for anything, no taxes etc, but this is under the condition you don't use any of it. Want protection without state police? Fine - go get your own private police or learn to physically defend yourself. Want protection from fire without state firefighters? Learn to put out fires or privately hire someone who can.

The rest of us carry on as normal within a state system. People who are either apolitical or who are socialist or centrist.

If the government is so 'oppressive', surely this would be a utopia for capitalist libertarians?

Would this mean that there wouldn't be any legal trouble for someone who steals from/hurts an outlaw, either?

Bigger question is how would we monitor that the outlaws don't use the services? How do we make sure that they don't sneak in to libraries, for examble? Also, if someone becomes an outlaw once, would it be for life or would they be allowed to become a proper citizen again if they wanted to? If yes, then how long would they have to be one and pay taxes before they would get services again? Or would they have to pay to get their citizenship back?

They exists a "Sovereign Citizens" -- people who stake out their property as sovereign territory and refuse to pay taxes.  Unfortunately for them, if their houses catch fire, they have to pay for the time and materials required for the nearest fire department to put the fire out.

Speaking of "sovereign citizens" have you heard of micronations such as Molossia, founded by its President Kevin Baugh? I wrote a blog about it once and got a response from him but can't locate the link at the moment.

Legal trouble, no.

Trouble, yes. Whatever they could afford or muster up on their own.

In fact, that's what happened in medieval times when it came to outlaws. They weren't part of the township. They had to defend themselves and if they were robbed from, no trouble came to the thief except whatever revenge the outlaw met out.

Trouble is I think in some cases, prison provided by the state is the best/least vindictive punishment. Not in terms of theft - make someone give you the money back/item back or steal something back. But in terms of rape and violence.

Would someone decide to (take all the state language niceties out of it...) kidnap someone, imprison them and keep them alive out of revenge for the murder of a loved one rather than killing them out of revenge to a loved one? Would it be 'moral' to punish in that way - if not then what non-state punishment would be moral & enough? Whereas the state sending someone to prison for life rather than punishing them through the death penalty is realistic - because of the lack of emotional investment. And the prison option is the humane one when it comes to the state.

Then why don't libertarians who think the state is the 'source of all evil' choose to become sovereign citizens rather than complaining about being forced to be a state citizen? Especially since they strongly believe in the responsibility of the individual and not being part of 'victim culture'?

You would have to get the answer from the Libertarians; but if I had to guess, it would likely be because they they enjoy knowing that if they dial 911, the police, the fire department, an ambulance, and the gas company would arrive within 10 to 15 minutes.

If they were Sovereign Citizens, the 911 dispatcher might tell them "We're sorry, but we only operate on American soil".

I'm not sure you understand the historic concept of outlawry. Basically anyone who supported an outlaw was also violating the law and liable to be punished. They were to be denied both fire and water and could be legally killed on the spot by any man who wished.