Comment: Don't get...

(See in situ)


Don't get...

...me wrong. I'm all for minimizing laws and maximizing Liberty. I'm perfectly fine with and push for getting government completely out of marriage, the drug war, the welfare and warfare state, etc. I'm all for self-reliance and self-defense, etc., etc. It sounds more like you favor NO laws, whereas I favor few laws--such as those against murder, theft, rape, etc. I think even if you could get rid of all such laws, it wouldn't be long before folks started to regroup and form alliances and new laws to help protect everyone in their circle against such things through the threat of prosecution against those who would attempt it. I don't like the idea of vigilantes all roaming the countryside as judge, jury and executioner, to seek vengeance against those who wronged them. Isn't there a place in society for the rule of law in a civilized manner, rather than tooth and claw law of the jungle?

I wish that a utopia without any laws was possible. Because people do not perfectly live out Love for their neighbors and enemies (self-regulation), there will always be the need for some external regulation (law) to help keep evils in check.

I can understand a debate about the degree and scope of laws and whether they should be local or state or federal; but the idea of no laws just doesn't make sense to me, as to how that would work or last. Certainly Dr. Paul does not advocate there being no murder laws at all?