” Second, libertarianism allows for the use of violence in self-defense.” Meaning that under no circumstances are government-armies allowed. Because those are only capable of offending (attacking/assaulting), never defending. (I blogged about this previously, but it deserves a repetition and quick summary).
Professional armies only lead to more crime at home, because:
- Those armies will have to be sent on penal-expeditions, because that way, the tax money is put to some use. Also, they provoke territorial/colonial itches in political groins.
- In order to send armies on expeditions, support must be drummed up with war-hysteria, jingoism.
- This keeps the people agitated, and their humours inflamed/out of balance and more likely to strike out at anyone.
Evidence for this, is #Switzerland. Where the entire male population has to enter military service, to learn how to use a gun, then take that gun & ammo home, and get called upon to defend the country against an invader, it means the entire country is its own defense. So an invasion is pretty darn unlikely: the traditional approach of having a small, dedicated army try to defend a whole, big country against an invader, is just silly. Such a narrow line of defense for a deep & wide whole like a country?
It also means that the bankers/plumbers are not willing to put their jobs on hold to get sent on penal expeditions to countries that never harmed them, so the government does not even try, because when their taxpayers are out killing and getting killed back, it hurts the tax base for government.
The lack of jingoism leads to a happier society. So much so, that Switzerland has very low murder rates (as compared to countries that do have professional, standing/roaming armies.)
Now, Switzerland has not only never been invaded, itself has also never invaded.
Consequently, the humours among the Swiss population are still largely in balance, and the rates for both murder and self-murder (suicide) are astonishingly low (you weren’t expecting 0, where you?) I rest my case: gun possession by the people is better for the country than gun possession by the government.