(December 14, 2022 at 4:44 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(December 13, 2022 at 11:43 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: For about the same reason 2nd Amendment was written: everybody being armed prevents a government (or, for that sake, a monopoly of security companies) from getting too tyrranical.
Never mind (for now) the fact that history shows you to be wrong, I'm interested to see how you reconcile those two positions:
1. Everyone being armed would prevent a State from forming.
2. Everyone being armed prevents the State from being too tyrannical.
How can the State become tyrannical when it never formed in the first place?
Boru
I thought that, by "forming a state in a libertarian society", you mean the following happens:
1) Crime raises to the level that cannot be controlled simply by everybody being armed. (I see no reason to think that will happen, but let's say so.)
2) Some entrepreneurs start "security companies" that are supposed to help against crime. And people buy into their propaganda. (OK, I guess it's possible. After all, people are buying into egg industry propaganda that they aren't causing superbacteria, which is even more ridiculous than saying that a company can help us against crime.)
3) Those companies start making contracts with each other, effectively forming a monopoly (Really? And not a single company will proclaim itself to protect from other security companies? Like NSA and TOR Project work against each other?).
4) That monopoly starts doing tyrranical things. So, you call it a "state".
