Libertarian land ownership theory

Kitsune · 08-09-2006, 12:28 PM

Okay, seriously, my question:

If I setup a shooting range on my property and your property is downrange and I hit a window, I'm responsible and owe damages. You can't stop me from setting up a shooting range on my property, but my actions affected you and you can prove it.

If I setup a coal burning powerplant on my property, you cannot stop me nor can you pass any laws preventing it. The smoke from the burning coal may drift high over your property, but the mercury from that smoke can pollute your rivers, streams, lakes, and oceans. The damage caused can be widespread and affect many people in many countries: Food supplies can be contaminated, pollution can destroy crops, ocean waters and the life in them thousands of miles away can be impacted. The output causes damage both in terms of property and in terms of human life.

Yet, it is not your land and you have no ownership of it. I am not trespassing on your land. The land and power plant belong to me, not to you. I can do with them as I please. Proof of indirect damage is difficult and you cannot force me to test the plant emissions. How does the theory of libertarian land ownership handle this?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

08-09-2006, 12:28 PM	#11
Kitsune still eats dirt Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 3,031	Okay, seriously, my question: If I setup a shooting range on my property and your property is downrange and I hit a window, I'm responsible and owe damages. You can't stop me from setting up a shooting range on my property, but my actions affected you and you can prove it. If I setup a coal burning powerplant on my property, you cannot stop me nor can you pass any laws preventing it. The smoke from the burning coal may drift high over your property, but the mercury from that smoke can pollute your rivers, streams, lakes, and oceans. The damage caused can be widespread and affect many people in many countries: Food supplies can be contaminated, pollution can destroy crops, ocean waters and the life in them thousands of miles away can be impacted. The output causes damage both in terms of property and in terms of human life. Yet, it is not your land and you have no ownership of it. I am not trespassing on your land. The land and power plant belong to me, not to you. I can do with them as I please. Proof of indirect damage is difficult and you cannot force me to test the plant emissions. How does the theory of libertarian land ownership handle this?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)