In my definition of police, prison guards are also "police". They HAVE been privatized so based on that definition, your statement about police not being able to be privatized is untrue.
As far as my not being a libertarian under your definition ...
Well ... I took that lib test and even with the views I previously stated, it said I was a personal freedom libertarian. If that test is incorrect perhaps they should change it.
You know Free Tally ,,, we have so far seen eye to eye on the issues. I'm somewhat surprised that you would react the way you did when I stepped a little out of the "party" line. This is what a lot of Libertarians accuse GOP's of doing.
BUT alright a better analogy ... the street in front of my house has been bought from the county by a private company. The company will not let ne use the sidewalk nor the street unless I submit to a strip search by their PRIVATE officers. Is THIS a violation of my rights. after all I don't have to use their street or sidewalk ... of course I can't leave my property with using them ... so I starve to death unless I comply.
An other analogy ...
ALL retail stores have formed a coalition in that they will not let anyone on their property who does NOT have the ID chip embedded and 666 tatooed to their head. Granted I could grow my own food BUT the real estate company / title companies are also part of this coalition so I can't buy property and the seed store won't let me buy seed for the same reason ... oh and that private water company .. they won't let me have water without that chip either ... NOW WHAT!!!!
of course I can't leave my property without using them
I'm sorry you feel that way, but when someone attacks freedom of association, I see no room for accepting they believe in libertarian positions. Like I stated before, freedom of association IS the basis of a free people. This concept is not even debatable.
BUT alright a better analogy ... the street in front of my house has been bought from the county by a private company. The company will not let ne use the sidewalk nor the street unless I submit to a strip search by their PRIVATE officers. Is THIS a violation of my rights. after all I don't have to use their street or sidewalk ... of course I can't leave my property with using them ... so I starve to death unless I comply.
Streets are usually dedicated as "public" and that can not be revoked. If it was a private road(yes, there many), then you created the situation you are in. Secondly, this is absurd, given commonly understood real estate law and concepts.
An other analogy ...
ALL retail stores have formed a coalition in that they will not let anyone on their property who does NOT have the ID chip embedded and 666 tatooed to their head. Granted I could grow my own food BUT the real estate company / title companies are also part of this coalition so I can't buy property and the seed store won't let me buy seed for the same reason ... oh and that private water company .. they won't let me have water without that chip either ... NOW WHAT!!!!
Again, absurd "without the government, we will all perish under the iron fist of capitalists" nonsense. Are you sure you have not been reading Marx? In addition, a well armed populance would prevent such a situation from ever occuring, IMO.
I have never had the discussion about "freedom of association" without these absurd analogies/situations being used. Think about it - this is the same argument that Jesse Jackass, Fat Al and their ilk use to justify handouts, quotas and policies that discrinate against all "non-blacks". Its the same argument, but slightly altered to be, "without government protection, racist whitey will oppress and destroy our race".
Many people do have the same opinion as you. But think about this: Would you patronize a business that openly stated "no black employees allowed"? I would assume not from your writings. Most people would be just like you. Guess what, the business wouldn't last. Same as if one or two businesses decided they would only pay $1.00/hr as the wage. No one would work for that company, and there would be tons of others offering reasonable, competitive wages.
You are buying in to the "capitalist conpsiracy" that Marxists/Socialists want you to believe - without government, every single owner of production would colude due to their greed and "shaft the little guy". They deny the free market. I do not.
ALL retail stores have formed a coalition in that they will not let anyone on their property who does NOT have the ID chip embedded and 666 tatooed to their head. Granted I could grow my own food BUT the real estate company / title companies are also part of this coalition so I can't buy property and the seed store won't let me buy seed for the same reason ... oh and that private water company .. they won't let me have water without that chip either ... NOW WHAT!!!!
Your extremely unrealistic hypothetical wherein initiation of force is not permitted would be a fantastic opportunity for much less restrictive companies to gain market share. That's how free market competition unfolds. The main problem with you hypothetical is that you thought it exists in a vacuum.