I try to offer these people a way out that lets them save face. As I see it, the ZAP is a great way out. Just don't initiate force again, and you won't face any retribution from me. (Well, if you have hurt one of my kids in the past I can't promise to not go insane and violate my principles, and I don't believe it would be right for me to do so ... but you have been warned.)
-
And please don't forget.
.
Kent,
ReplyDeleteWhat about those who are not "seduced?" Actual criminals?
Does non-aggression, to you, allow retribution-by that I mean violent retaliation-say for rape, or murder?
Personally, I have no problem with retaliation in principle, though in practice I suspect it would be very dangerous due to counter-retaliation. The end result, I think, would be a society of far more careful individuals than we have now. Which is certainly not a bad thing.
To paraphrase Heinlein, an armed society is a polite society, and a society without government is very polite!
Those actual criminals are not "most people", fortunately. The basically-good outnumber the bad by a huge margin.
ReplyDeleteI think retaliation and revenge violate non-aggression. Depending on the circumstances, I might go very easy on it if I were arbitrating a dispute like that, but I don't believe it is right, and certainly don't believe it is within someone's rights to do that. But, it could be understandable.