Heath Winchester wrote:I'm not going to say that people can do everything they want. Example: I am against child prostitution. Therefore there would be a few laws in place to prevent that from happening. There would also be laws in place for murder. Very strict laws I will tell you. If the government didn't have a whole lot of power, then when serious crimes happen the punishments would be severe. I also think local police forces would be better well equipped and much stronger. They wouldn't be wasting time with potheads, or people speeding etc. They would be looking for rapists, murders and and all that.
This tells me your vision of government is that of a punisher. You need to understand that punishment is the least effective way of dealing with a problem because it depends on the act being discovered and the wrong-doer being caught. There is a hierarchy of techniques for dealing with wrong behavior.
1. Ethical Education. If you convince people that bad things are bad, not because one can get punished for doing them but because they truly are inherently bad. You will most effectively prevent the bad behavior.
2. Removal of Desire. If you make it so people simply have no reason to do bad behavior then they are less likely to behave badly. This is the second most effective.
3. Removal of Opportunity. If you make it so people do even have the ability to behave badly then they will not behave badly. This could be seen as most effective except that people will find ways to fight this obvious form of oppression.
4. Positive Reinforcement. If you reward people for doing the opposite of the bad behavior then people will be less likely to do the bad behavior, assuming the reward outweighs any costs or the possible rewards of the bad behavior. This only work until the bad behavior becomes more rewarding then the good behavior.
5. Punishment. If you hurt or take away the property or freedom of those who do bad behavior should convince people not to repeat the bad behavior and hopefully will set an example for others so they will not behave badly either. This do not work if the loss of the reward from the bad behavior outweighs the punishment. For instance, if you were being paid 10,000 dollars to drive 150 MPH down the highway, and the punishment for speeding down that highway was 100 dollars most people would be inclined to continue the bad behavior because it one would still net 9,900 dollars even if they got caught. If the punishment is made bad enough to make the bad behavior no longer rewarding if one gets caught, there is still the issue of catching the people who behave badly. It is much harder to successful implement this method of behavior control then for the other kinds.
Things like socialized medicine, public education, welfare, and public work relief programs are methods of preventing bad behavior that employ some of the more effective methods. They are less expensive and less oppressive then the efforts of a "punisher state" that seeks only to punish those who have already committed the bad behavior.
Heath Winchester wrote:No, I must say I'm pretty close to being your typical Anarchist or possibly Libertarian.
I can not see how you could call yourself an anarchist. You do not want a weakened government you want a police state that set up laws based on your own ethical views.