It’s all good and well to boldly state (in the post https://ludwigvanel.wordpress.com/2016/10/26/the-current-approach-to-justice-doesnt-work-2/ ) that recompensing victims is better than #punishing wrong-doers, but what about #murder? Recompensing victims of murder won’t do much good, since the victims are dead. Letting the perpetrators walk free then?
First, let me get out of the way that #fear of murderers is a bit of an irrational fear. Most murderers target one specific person (say, out of vengeance), once that murder has been committed, the desire has been fulfilled.
In fact, the only ones to continue murdering after the first time, are assassins (aka soldiers). So in an anarchy we don’t have to worry about this much.
Of course, that’s not saying that there will be no murder under anarchy (there may be heated arguments resulting in accidental death; so manslaughter may still occur)
(Since there is no overarching body of government to ban victimless crimes, there will not be any drugsmaffia killing competitors and snitches), only the way that wil be dealt with will differ. Since murderers are unlikely to re-kill an already dead person, it equally unlikely that locking them up will do anybody any good. Certainly not the victim, who, as we’ve determined, is already dead. But there are others that got harmed by the death of the dearly departed, like surviving family members that are now left without a provider, or the employer that now has to make do with one less productive resource. So here too, #restitution-based justice is superior to a #revenge-based legal system.