>>212901737
Well that's true. The problem with criminality is that a truly libertarian state can only deal with it, if it's libertarian from the beginning and able to nip it in the bud as it arises.
A citizen posse can easily maintain order when the crime is just one fucko trying to peddle heroin to schoolkids on the streetcorner or something.
The problem arises with states that have maintained 'due process' as well as anti-vigilantism to the point where criminal enterprises reach massive presence and penetration over society. Once it reaches that point, even if you do revert to 'full libertarianism now' it's not going to help.
You live in a town that's terrorised by a drug cartel. They take money from who they want. They kill anyone who speaks against them. Sometimes the state might arrest one of them, but if anyone in town testifies against them or provides evidence against them, that person and their entire family will get slaughtered by the rest of the gang. So the 'due process and fair laws and innocent until proven guilty' system fails.
Even if every citizen in town was suddenly relieved of all laws, perfect libertarianism was established and guns fell into their hands from above, it's still very doubtful they'd be able and willing to kill the cartel themselves. Not when it's them and their families who are going to be getting killed in return. They live in terror.
The only option at that point to solve the problem is authoritarian police state, what is effectively military action. No more innocent until proven guilty. The problem has gotten so bad that it needs to be excised regardless of the moral cost to 'free democratic principles'. That's how Mussolini eradicated the Mafia and that's how El Salvador destroyed the gangs, in very short order.
Obviously the real moral of the story is that we should never let society degrade to such a dire position in the first place. But that's exactly where soft touch semi-authoritarian anarcho-tyranny is taking us.
