Dr. Alexander Tabarrok wrote:
>Harry Browne ... said that the way a free society would handle war is to
>offer a prize to the person or persons who assassinated the leader(s) of
>the opposing country. ... say 500 million should provide plenty of
>motivation to guards, wives, snipers etc.
How rel
If I am not mistaken, an homicide justified by moral reasons
is called "execution", not "assassination".
P.L.
PIERRE LEMIEUX
Visiting Professor , Université du Québec à Hull
Director of the Groupe de Recherche Économie et Liberté (GREL)
Research Fellow, Indepe
"Alex Tabarrok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" wrote:
> Are there any good reasons for an anti-assassination policy?
Let us consider two situations:
* Not quite war (Cuba, Serbia until last week, Cold War USSR, etc.):
Killing a leader will only make him a martyr, esp. if he ha
In a message dated 10/5/00 5:54:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Harry Browne, the libertarian candidate, said that the way a free society
would handle war is to offer a prize to the person or persons who
assassinated the leader(s) of the opposing country. (..)
This pr
makes sense from the point of view of the leaders.
Are there any good reasons for an anti-assassination policy?
Alex
--
Dr. Alexander Tabarrok
Vice President and Director of Research
The Independent Institute
100 Swan Way
Oakland, CA, 94621-1428
Tel. 510-632-1366, FAX: 510-568-6040
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
