Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

overcomingbias.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 75 posts

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#21

Post by fao_ »

bassman9000 wrote: post #5

Yet we still suffer from a great deal of police corruption and mistreatment, because government employees can coordinate well to create a blue wall of silence. So, to fix one minor problem, we're getting rid of equality before law, and paving the way for feudalistic corporations, getting one step closer to Snow Crash? No, thanks.

I'm not really sure why you're getting downvoted. You make a perfectly good point that is recognized in most intellectual circles -- anarcho-capitalism (which is basically the core proposal here) is strongly related to feudalism.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#22

Post by crankylinuxuser »

This is about as well thought out as my old professor's idea of "the roads should be illuminated, and there's no need for headlights".

1. Require insurance to live? Do you know how hard it is to even keep the PPACA? And you want everybody insured with criminal liability insurance???

2. Ah, I get it. So rich people can just pay to make it go away.

3. What about poor people? Unless you're subsidizing that "insurance", they ain't gonna get it. Cant afford it. You're just grinding people into more poverty.

4. And you think getting rid of jury trials is a good thing? The other main system is "Judge or Professional Jurors" Nope, nope, and fuck no.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#23

Post by DoofusOfDeath »

nickik wrote: post #13
atlantic wrote: post #10

> I propose to instead privatize the detection, prosecution, and punishment of crime. Yes, because privatization of the prison system worked out so well, didn't it? So let's go the whole hog and privatize the entire justice system.

These two things are very different and if you don't have any smart arguments then why post at all?

I think the conversation would benefit from you explaining the important distinctions that you think the GP failed to make.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#24

Post by mikestew »

nickik wrote: post #13
atlantic wrote: post #10

> I propose to instead privatize the detection, prosecution, and punishment of crime. Yes, because privatization of the prison system worked out so well, didn't it? So let's go the whole hog and privatize the entire justice system.

These two things are very different and if you don't have any smart arguments then why post at all?

Three things, actually, one of which "prisons" fall under. I find it a quite reasonable argument to say that privatizing one of those three things hasn't worked out so well, so why would we think privatizing all three would be a good idea?

And you might want to dial back the snark a bit. Parent might not be the most substantive thing I read today, but your final phrase was uncalled for.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#26

Post by chasingthewind »

A lot of the snarky comments are getting downvoted but I must admit that my first reaction to reading even a few paragraphs of this article was essentially revulsion.

I get that the rationalist community is really trying very hard to figure out novel ways to solve difficult problems and I am very supportive of that goal. I love reading Marginal Revolution for one, and I'm highly susceptible to the argument that there are likely to be surprising ways we might shift our thinking about difficult issues.

However private enterprise has so many unpredictable incentives that I simply would never want to subject myself to a system like this unless it had been proven to work for a long time someplace else (color me a private crime fighter NIMBY).

My view is that we need to improve our traditional government run justice and law enforcement systems, not privatize them.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#27

Post by UpshotKnothole »

nickik wrote: post #12

There is a long history of this kind of thing and many great economists have talked about different version to make the legal system more efficient. There are different ideas how to innovate and sometimes privatize certain aspects. Some interesting reads that people might enjoy. David Friedman (son of Milton) has been studying this for quite a while. For example in he had this talk about how criminal law should be ab…

Maybe efficiency shouldn’t be the highest goal of the criminal justice system, and maybe innovation and profit shouldn’t be either. There is plenty of room for reform of the current system without destroying it in favor of some dystopian protostome, eating lives and shitting money. Instead of this insane and inhumane proposition I’d suggest an end to the war on drugs, and fundamentally rethinking matters such as bail, jailing people who are not a danger to society, and mental health issues.

If all of thst is done and we still see a need for greater efficiencies in a much reduced system, then we can talk.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#28

Post by ohazi »

This is a terrible idea on its own, but I find it particularly unpalatable because the author is deliberately tickling the fancy of all the "My theories are so beautiful and internally consistent" libertarians who wouldn't be able to identify a negative externality if it punched them in the nose.

I've had this discussion a million times in college. It's always a dumpster fire.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#29

Post by makecheck »

umvi wrote: post #2

My initial thought is that this would create a "wild west" type society where bounty hunters go around and have shootouts with criminals, but without police training. Also, how are cash fines going to work against broke criminals? "Oh, you stole a bunch of money because you have no money. Pay a fine"

Punishments should focus a lot more on the situation of the person involved.

For example, community service if you can’t pay a fine. If you don’t have time due to multiple jobs, kids, etc. then perhaps the state offers services to give you time (day care, food or travel credits, whatever). Sure, the state pays for that but is it really so bad to pay for these things when we pay to run jails anyway? Seems we’d have fewer desperate “criminals” if we just treated them like people.

If you have little money and need to be working multiple jobs, etc. then of course bail, fines, and jail time will completely screw you and you’ll end up even more desperate and likely to (say) steal again. And since people aren’t just leaving stuff around to be stolen, you’d probably accomplish that through property damage (more charges! more jail!) or, unfortunately, weapons (despite best intentions, things go bad and you’re desperate and assault occurs: more charges! more jail!). This is an insane cycle.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#30

Post by lliamander »

umvi wrote: post #2

My initial thought is that this would create a "wild west" type society where bounty hunters go around and have shootouts with criminals, but without police training. Also, how are cash fines going to work against broke criminals? "Oh, you stole a bunch of money because you have no money. Pay a fine"

> My initial thought is that this would create a "wild west" type society where bounty hunters go around and have shootouts with criminals, but without police training.

As I understand it, the western frontier was actually relatively crime free (low rates of murder, robbery, etc.)

With regards to training, it seems like something vocational schools could offer at reasonable rates.

Post reply on HN