[Dead Corpse]

You are missing the point. RIGHT NOW, with all your vaunted laws in place, you do not even have the opportunity to fight back. In some States, you WILL be prosecuted for fighting back. Actually KILL your attacker, and you may see more jail time than he would have.

This is a sane system to you? This is preferable?

This also glosses over the part about being able to own and carry weapons without interference. You can't fight a fire if you don't have a fire extinguisher because some arbitrary LAW says you can't have one.

Under a libertarian system, courts would still exist. However, adjudication would only come through a mutually agreed upon, and contractually binding, court. Fail to pay up would be the same as not paying a debt or welching on a contract. No one would do business with you. You'd be an outcast. Possible you could starve to death if no one would sell you food. Also possible that your "victim" would just challenge you to a duel and kill you that way for failing to live up to your word.

Bunch of "honor" type stuff all mixed in there. Kinda goes with the territory. You start thinking ethically, next thing you know, you are acting ethically. Honor comes from the realization that your word really does mean something.

It's a neat subject.

[carlr]

Under a libertarian system, courts would still exist. However, adjudication would only come through a mutually agreed upon, and contractually binding, court. Fail to pay up would be the same as not paying a debt or welching on a contract. No one would do business with you. You'd be an outcast. Possible you could starve to death if no one would sell you food. Also possible that your "victim" would just challenge you to a duel and kill you that way for failing to live up to your word.

Bunch of "honor" type stuff all mixed in there. Kinda goes with the territory. You start thinking ethically, next thing you know, you are acting ethically. Honor comes from the realization that your word really does mean something.

You see that is my point,you must still have a legal authority,but than rely on an "honor" system of sorts for enforcement.

The problem still lies in the old saying "there is no honor among thieves".What happens if someone refuses to agree to your premise?

It is not a perfect system that we have but despite the flaws and shortcomings show me one anywhere in the world that works better.

Thanks for engaging in a civilized debate of a difference of opinion.
That is sorely lacking often,even here at FR.