The operational definition of a state is an entity which is conceded the privilege of using coercive force by the residents of some region. The residents of the region concede the state that privilege because they also concede it to have jurisdiction (remember that word) over events in that region. Thus, there exists an implicit bargain between the state and its residents: “You,” the residents say, “may wield coercive force, but in return we expect that you will enforce the laws you have dictated.”
Jurisdiction, etymologically, means “the pronouncement of laws.” In a land that upholds individual rights as a fundamental concept, for the state’s jurisdiction to be other than a tyranny, it must pronounce and enforce laws that protect and defend those rights. Should the state default on that obligation, it will forfeit its claim to jurisdiction – and therefore to its monopoly over the use of coercive force.
Which brings us to this atrocity:
The two teen girls accused of killing an Uber driver in a botched carjacking in Washington, DC, in March are expected to reach a plea deal with prosecutors in the case.
The bargain should be reached in the coming days, but it’s unclear if it will fully resolve the case, according to the Washington Post.
The girls are due back in court on April 20 to discuss the status of the case, the outlet said.
The pair, ages 13 and 15, have been charged with felony murder, carjacking and armed robbery in the deadly incident, which they allegedly carried out near Nationals Park in the Southeast section of the nation’s capital.
Under DC law, the 13-year-old can’t be charged as an adult — even in a murder case, according to the Post. The 15-year-old suspect could be charged as an adult, but that would increase the burden of proof on prosecutors, the report said.
Other sources suggest that the deal mentioned above has already been concluded, and that it guarantees no prison time to either of the young murderers. Some might find this tolerable…possibly even praiseworthy. “They’re just kids,” the chant will run. “You can’t treat them as if they were fully responsible adults!” If the deal proves real, would you say that the state has enforced the law against felony murder?
There are also laws in all fifty states against rioting, arson, and vandalism. Those laws have gone conspicuously unenforced in a slew of American cities this past year. Moreover, those who have engineered and encouraged those riots are pleased with the results. Why else would they “predict” even more of them?
MODEL and Black Lives Matter activist Maya Echols has warned “all hell is gonna break loose” if Derek Chauvin isn’t convicted for the death of George Floyd.
In a video published on TikTok, Echols cautioned that Minneapolis would suffer more riots and vandalism, similar to the chaos that unfolded in the city last May in response to Floyd’s fatal Memorial Day arrest.
“If George Floyd’s murderer is not sentenced, just know that all hell is gonna break loose,” the activist is heard saying in the since-deleted clip.
“Don’t be surprised when building are on fire. Just sayin’,” she added.
Let’s imagine Miss Echols’s prediction to be accurate. Should that prove true, would you say the afflicted states have enforced the laws against rioting, arson, and vandalism?
No, I wouldn’t either.
The complete failure of the states to enforce the most fundamental of their laws – the ones that purport to defend the rights to life, liberty, and property – must be counterpoised to those states’ ever more relentless enforcement of laws that have no such import:
- Laws that drain us through rising taxation;
- Laws that infringe upon our right to work and earn;
- Laws that minutely license and regulate our use of our property.
Such laws have nothing to do with the protection of individuals’ rights. Indeed, they invade, abridge, and infringe upon those rights. Nevertheless, they’re enforced with a humorless ferocity. Some of the recent ukases from the governors of “blue states” even threaten our right to move about freely (cf. “vaccination passports”).
Can you say anarcho-tyranny?
It cannot be put better than that. They who wield coercive force without penalty have a fair claim to being agents of the state, if not the whole of it. In such a situation, civil war is not only inevitable but desirable:
War is not coming. It is here. If you need any more proof than the shortage of available firearms and ammunition, look to the censorship of the news from the front. War may not be at your doorstep today, but any sapient individual understands that time is of the essence.
And for its sins the state, whatever its elevation or claimed locale, will be responsible for everything that follows.