...hypothetical, I hope I would let the other person live, or die trying to. For the situation with ten people, I hope I would try to persuade others to get some children on the boat, whose combined weight would be less than the one-man limit. I'm sure there'd be some desperate folks ready to shove the kids off and fight to take their place, though.
I have to say, I really cringed at the second hypothetical. Are there really people here who would gun down people fleeing? Just because I might believe that there wasn't a chance any would live after fleeing towards the attackers, doesn't mean it would be certain. But let's say it was certain death -- I would never shoot these people. I might try to restrain them from leaving, to keep them from harm; but to murder them? No. If I was so cold-blooded or out of my mind, I hope another one of the armed people would restrain me, or otherwise defend these people.
In the third scenario, if there were no existing free-market protection agencies willing to defend these people, then if individuals in the free market would rather have an agency that would defend such people in addition to themselves, a new agency would emerge to satisfy that demand in the market. But if you stipulate that no new agencies can be formed, then it would come down to individuals coordinating outside of any agencies to voluntarily defend them. I would hope there would be many such individuals who would come to their aid, as a gift of Love.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderator