View Single Post
  #72 (permalink)  
Old 03-22-2008, 10:07 PM
Phædrus's Avatar
Phædrus Phædrus is offline
Sarcasm on the rocks.
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Userid: 152
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 2,375
Rep Power: 4
Phædrus is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryDavidThoreau View Post
I had a question for libertarians and instead of making a new thread I decided t post it here, hope that is ok for all.

What is the typical libertarian stance on conspiracy charges? No crime has been committed and no one has been harmed only planned to be harmed. What if it is a conspiracy charge where there is no physical evidence of the conspiracy only a witness testimony? Do you consider it "thought-crime" or "pre-crime".
Thought crime is ridiculous. However, if someone is conspiring to kill the president, it would make sense to take them down before their plan went into action. If they were actually going to commit the crime and took steps towards its completion, that would be considered a crime. If they just thought it out and planned it, but didn't take any steps towards actually doing it, then there was no crime.

Quote:
Also I decide to add to this thread, companies even under a libertarian government should have strict restrictions on the exhast they put out since lead, mercury etc. harm all that breath the air, drink water etc.
I would consider that reasonable. I don't want to eat a fish that's been contaminated with mercury or formaldehyde. The limits would have to be founded in scientific fact about what levels would be acceptable (I'd consider less than one preventable death/injury/cancer/etc. per million to be acceptable), though, not just arbitrary limits set by some committee with no or few scientists on it.
__________________
An' it harm none, do as ye' will.


Never argue with an idiot. He'll just drag you down to his level of intelligence and beat you with experience.
Reply With Quote