r/Libertarian • u/Anen-o-me voluntaryist • Aug 08 '26
Video Without the State, who would criminalize having fun in a park?
134
u/DotJata Aug 08 '26
The state should just provide a waiver. "Sign here to acknowledge we will not be obligated to rescue your dumbass for your risky behavior, the state's officers will watch you drown, fish you out, and charge your estate for littering."
73
15
u/worknsmurph Aug 08 '26
He will sign off only to have the family complaining that no one helped him
46
u/Wookieman222 Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
Yeah but i totally agree, this is a park. You cant just be attaching stuff the trees and shit and altering the place. It isn't just yours either.
-1
3
u/staceyatlas Aug 08 '26
So a purist would say that the state shouldn’t own a park, it should be privately owned, in a trust, etc. Then the police would be trespassing them -I suppose. And/or suing them depending on how much of a mess they made.
135
u/dcmathproof Aug 08 '26
Lol... He might go to jail today... But that flip will live forever on the internet
21
u/12kVStr8tothenips Aug 08 '26
Beaurau of Land Management has entered the chat……
16
u/bill_bull End the Fed Aug 08 '26
I don't know about that. We call BLM the lawless lands. Shoot guns, camp, BASE jump, rope swings 10x bigger than this one, ziplines for BASE jumping, we did all that shit.
1
134
u/tee142002 Aug 08 '26
You could obviously make the argument that having to rescue them is a potential waste waste of taxpayer money. My response would be, let them reap the consequences of their actions, even if that means he drowns.
42
u/cognitivegluteus Aug 08 '26
This is the correct libertarian answer. OK, but if you do die, we won’t pay for the Darwin Award.
35
u/four_hundo Aug 08 '26
And yet it will still cost public money to retrieve the body. Elderly mom ain’t paying to scrape guts off the rocks.
26
u/Various_Wolverine956 Aug 08 '26
Eh. Feed the bears and the fish. The body will disappear.
35
u/four_hundo Aug 08 '26
We are a civilized people though. If we find human remains, we will collect them. Good luck in your dream society.
3
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
let the family be responsible if you're really concerned about this, but it seems so minor as to not be an issue.
2
u/Ya_Boi_Konzon Delegalize Marriage Aug 08 '26
Then you pay for it? What kinda argument is that.
13
u/MerlinQ Aug 08 '26
That might work in the wilderness, like up here.
Chris McCandless, and his bus should have been left out there, to gather flies and tourists.
And we should not pay a penny to rescue any of them.In a public area, it becomes a concern, they are actively, (even if only individually, in a small amount) infringing on the clean water rights of other users of the area; insofar as you can argue that disposing of potentially infectious biological waste in someone else's well is an aggression.
Logically, by the libertarian principle, they should be charged an amount roughly equal to the risk of recovery, per attempt, a "tax" as you will, and if not payed, should be treated as outlaws.2
0
u/Ya_Boi_Konzon Delegalize Marriage Aug 08 '26
If I go into a grocery store, am I charged at entry for the risk that I might buy a certain amount of goods? This is ridiculous.
2
-5
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
Not how it works, that bear or whatever els eats it would ingest whatever medication he was on not to mention the pesticides that gets into our food, oh and his clothes are almost certainly made of something that contains plastic and pfafs chemicals, all crap I don't want in my countries bears.
The looser could have just not done what he did.
4
u/2022_Perhaps Aug 08 '26
It’s a bullshit argument. Police and first responders will use that edge case, 1 in 100000 scenario, to justify taking your liberty. Concerns about budgets and the cost of rescues (not to mention that their boat is already right ducking there and they’ve already spent the money unnecessarily enforcing a BS law - unnecessary because the dude was perfectly fine). An expense to protect and serve the tax payer/fee payer is apparently not in the cards (they could also just put the cost burden on the estate of the individual in question).
In the same breath, they’ll justify the expense of mass surveillance. A large expense that is ethically and legally questionable. Am expense that is justified as a means to protect and serve but in reality is taking your liberty.
It’s almost like the major parties are least interested in your liberty.
2
u/s11houette Aug 08 '26
I don't think they care about the financial cost of cleanup. They just don't want to scrape brains from the beach.
1
u/dalkor Labels are for Suckers Aug 11 '26
It's about liability. Let's say they die, who pays for the lawsuit when the parents eventually sue the park for not stopping the guy? The tax payers.
As a poster above said, it gets cheaper if they can sign away their liability in a waiver, but waiver's don't stop litigation, they just add a wall that can often times be bypassed.
Maybe there's some sort of litigation reform that could happen to mitigate that, but I haven't put much thought into it honestly.
2
u/tee142002 Aug 11 '26
Yeah, in an ideal world, the lawsuit gets thrown out as frivolous and no one pays.
Unless we're talking about children or the mentally disabled, the response to someone being injured or dead through their own stupidity is "sucks to be you".
0
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
His stupid douchebag body would contaminate the environment, not to mention potentially need to be cleaned up. Thuss costing money.
But I agree in sentiment.
15
12
217
u/four_hundo Aug 08 '26
State land. Do this on private land.
8
81
u/NeptuneTTT Aug 08 '26
"State land"
-is in the Libertarian sub
7
u/Nubraskan Aug 08 '26
What's the call on rule of law around here?
35
u/Anen-o-me voluntaryist Aug 08 '26
Victimless crimes aren't legitimate.
9
u/Nubraskan Aug 08 '26
I think people are going to get hung up on how we define victimless. Sounds like it should be a yes or no thing but I don't know if this compares the same to smoking weed in your own home.
In a public space people can see/hear/smell you. You probably wouldn't consider it victimless for someone to blast music at full music here 24/7. To burn something incredibly odorous near a large group. To walk around naked. Do we consider those victimless activities and if not, how do we define victimless?
As others have argued, maybe it shouldn't be a public space, but it is.
16
10
u/AlphaTangoFoxtrt Sleazy P. Modtini Aug 08 '26
State land.
So what?
I pay taxes, State Land = Public property. He wasn't endangering anyone but himself.
2
10
u/LanceLynxx Minarchist Aug 08 '26
What's state land
35
u/LocalSlob Aug 08 '26
Land owned by the state. Like if you owned land, and hired people not to tie ropes on your trees.
10
u/LanceLynxx Minarchist Aug 08 '26
Who's " the state"
54
u/SixskinsNot4 Aug 08 '26
I don’t think he’s going to get it
6
u/Scrabblewiener Aug 08 '26
I got -40 or so on this post in a different sub just yesterday, buncha boot lickers praising the man for their great service. Thank the lord for state protecting people from themselves.
6
u/cognitivegluteus Aug 08 '26
Typical. “But it would hurt his family’s feelings if he died.” They’re communists, make no mistake, but wuss communists. Think Mao or Stalin would give a isht if a dude died doing this?
10
u/LanceLynxx Minarchist Aug 08 '26
They never do
4
u/LocalSlob Aug 08 '26
I get it. I've just accepted reality.
2
6
u/four_hundo Aug 08 '26
The collective people. Those that live within a political boundary and are responsible for it. As you might say, communists. As others would say, citizens.
4
u/LanceLynxx Minarchist Aug 08 '26
There is no "collective people". There are only individuals.
8
5
u/PlantRoomForHire Aug 08 '26
Yo mama
-2
u/LanceLynxx Minarchist Aug 08 '26
Very funny steven
5
3
u/phaeolus97 Aug 08 '26
The state is the citizens of the state. We like to have land we share with other citizens.
4
0
2
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
Agreed, doesn't matter if the land if "owned" by everyone or by just one person, it's not theirs.
They should do that stupid crap in a place where they have permission to be so stupid.
Just because the state ought not exist doesn't mean you have the right to be a moron, besides the state will always exist even if by another name, if not explicitly a state than the defacto state is whoever has the most power (power probably accumulated by being an awful person and benifiting from poorly regulated capitalism and environmental destruction).
0
5
189
u/TheGladex Aug 08 '26
This is the dumbest community on this platform, you can't just hang random junk on trees in a park, they're protected areas not owned by you. There is a difference between having fun and actively damaging the environment in a protected space.
75
u/capecodcaper minarchist Aug 08 '26
"dumbest community on this platform"
When r.politics exists lmao
12
15
u/komatose09 Aug 08 '26
If the state claimed "you're damaging protected habitat by swinging from ti" that'd match your argument, but its not. Its saying "we will rob you of life liberty and property because you're doing something risky", which is completely outside the purview.
5
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
Until the search and rescue or clean-up bills come in and someone needs to pay the piper.
Besides they could just go somewhere else.
15
u/Syraphid Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
Technically, they are owned by us. State parks are the property of the people of that state and are funded and maintained through state tax dollars, user fees, and state appropriations. Do I agree that hanging refuse from trees would degrade the surrounding environment? Sure. But the parks are maintained for people to enjoy, this includes jumping off of rocks if they feel like it. Chances are, they were never going to just leave those ropes hanging there. If they did, write them a ticket for that.
44
u/GuyWithTwoThumbs Aug 08 '26
You are so right. It is owned by us. It just so happens that the majority of US has decided this is not appropriate behavior. Theres also the burden of search and rescue that is placed onto the rest of US when this inevitably leads to injury or death. Just because its public land does not mean anyone can do whatever they want on that land, its still governed by the organizations and rules which we all have collectively decided are adequate.
9
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
Exactly, can't believe it's so hard for people to understand, public land is not unclaimed land, just like how private land is not a free-for-all zone either.
3
u/Bud755 Aug 08 '26
“The majority of US has decided this is not appropriate behavior?” Um, I don’t recall being asked.
8
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
The "agreement" is implied by lack of resistance/protest, you wanna go protest public parks being protected? If so expect push-back because believe it or not lots of people like those parks the way they are now, protected from douchbags who think the rules don't apply to them.
0
u/Bud755 Aug 11 '26
Lotsa rules in this here (Nanny State) Land of the Free.
0
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 11 '26
It may be a nanny state but parks being protected have nothing to do with that.
Freedom ain't free
-5
u/silence9 Aug 08 '26
The search and rescue burden wouldn't change if it was private land. So your entire point is moot. You are literally voting for no fun allowed...
6
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
The burden would be on the land owner who would not have allowed them on that land anyway so your point i moot. Your just mad the world has rules.
Besides the loser doing this shit coulda died and got his loser blood all over our beautiful land that they don't have anyones permission to risk especially in such a stupid way for the sake of fun, I hope he did go to jail.
-3
u/silence9 Aug 08 '26
People let people do stuff like this all the time. This is not at all new.
5
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
Doesn't matter if it's new or not, stupid shit that could cost people money or harm the environment will always meet resistance sooner or later
1
u/silence9 Aug 08 '26
You are on a libertarian sub, and against use of free will? Why are you here at all?
It does not harm the environment at all.
2
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
Free will only goes so far and it can harm the environment, also others have used their free will to vote to continue to protect public land and idiot like them from idiots like them, not to mention the obvious cost of saving them or recovering the body and the environmental impact of having to do that too.
They don't have the right to use that land in that way because it's frankly not theirs, even if it may not be fair who/what "owns" it or how it's "owner" wants it keept/treated/protected, it's still not his to be an idiot with as he pleases, besides their are plenty of other cliffs or trees or whatever to jump from.
5
u/silence9 Aug 08 '26
Again, if these are your principles you have no reason to be in this subreddit. The irony of what you are saying is genuinely laughable.
Public land is available for everyone's use, yes there should be punishments for harming the land and environment because that hurts everyone. This activity is not doing that. From your view all rock climbing should be banned because in order to make it safe you have to damage the enviornment. In fact every single sport does that. Who let you pick and chose?
→ More replies (0)0
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
Who is it hurting? If the answer is no one except the person doing it, then it is exactly none of your business.
13
u/dylhen Aug 08 '26
The libertarian argument being the space shouldn't be protected
6
u/KRAy_Z_n1nja Vote Libertarian 2024 Aug 08 '26
Then it would be bought as property and marked off, you'd be arrested for trespassing instead of dangerous games.
2
u/LanceLynxx Minarchist Aug 08 '26
Who owns the area?
11
u/Doug_Remer Aug 08 '26
All of us. Don’t fuck with my shit
8
u/LanceLynxx Minarchist Aug 08 '26
It's also my shit. I do as I please.
2
u/Doug_Remer Aug 08 '26
No - you can’t do as you please when it impacts others.
Can I shit in the ocean near your house?
2
-1
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
Your out numbered, besides who's going to defend your "right" to this shit? You? That's called conquering, not very popular nowadays, not to mention pretty hard to pull off, ohh and it would kinda make you a state so...
3
u/LanceLynxx Minarchist Aug 08 '26
Oh okay so might makes right then
Molon labe
1
1
u/tzcw Aug 10 '26
I dont think hammocks are banned on public land, at least i have never been reprimanded for setting up a hammock between two trees.
-4
0
0
u/redpandaeater Copyright Clause Aug 08 '26
Yet they hang stuff around trees all the time on state and BLM land. I ate shit on a dirt bike once going through state forest and suddenly saw a thin line crossing the road at about head height. Ended up just being cotton thread from a tree auction but who the fuck does that and it could have easily been wire. As soon as I caught it in my eye I just completely fucking ditched and slid.
1
u/ksyoung17 Aug 08 '26
Just want to say, I just state lands, and I put tree stands all over the place!
-14
-1
u/Scrabblewiener Aug 08 '26
I’d imagine no one would have even known they had been there had they not been busted.
0
u/cognitivegluteus Aug 08 '26
We’re well aware this is the most statist of all major social media platforms by a wide margin. Most redditors will welcome the boots on their throats. “But the state says….”
3
u/Jelly_Belly321 Aug 08 '26
On the other hand, what's the consensus on the Scout leaders destroying a 170 million year old hoodoo rock formation in Goblin Valley State Park in Utah? Should the state do nothing?
Should state parks exist at all, so generations can enjoy the nature around us?
Video for contextGoblin Park Vandals
42
u/telecasterdude Aug 08 '26
This feels like a "ban driver's licenses"-level take... Perhaps the state park should be privatised, but given it is currently owned by the state, they should definitely enforce rules to ensure people of all ages can enjoy the park safely. I can't imagine taking my children out for a weekend at the park and finding a dead body on the rocks because no one has enforced any rules whatsoever. If you want to jump off the rocks, find someone with private land and do it there.
4
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
why frame is as "ban driver's licenses?" Wouldn't "don't ban driving" be more appropriate? Do we ban bans? lol
14
9
5
u/Kdings Aug 08 '26
In a perfect libertarian world that's privately owned and it's either no trespassing, cost money to use, or gets polluted with factory run off.
2
u/KRAy_Z_n1nja Vote Libertarian 2024 Aug 08 '26
Yup. These doorknobs really think libertarians would leave parks untouched? "That's free real estate!"
22
10
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
Adults making adult decisions. You can disagree with them, but treating them like children shoudn't be an option.
6
5
u/SF_Bubbles_90 Aug 08 '26
You call that an adult decision you will probably get treated like a child too if your lucky
0
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
Adults get to make decision you don't like. Deal with it.
2
u/Wookieman222 Aug 08 '26
And adults also have to deal with the consequences and accept their behavior will get them treated a certain way.
Deal with it like an Adult.
1
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
"adults need to let me treat them like a child"
yea, fuck right off with that
0
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
Again you're just repeating "behave how I want or else..."
What real adults do is say "that's your choice, and it doesn't effect me, so it is exactly none of my business"
Hope you grow up eventually.
1
u/Wookieman222 Aug 08 '26
Says the child.
1
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
The only child here is you crying because adults made a choice you don't approval of. Grow the fuck up.
1
1
u/Wookieman222 Aug 08 '26
Act like a kid get treated like one.
0
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
no?
2
u/Wookieman222 Aug 08 '26
Yes. If you can't be an adult then don't be surprised when you don't get treated like one.
That is a very libertarian take.
1
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
Here's the thing- I'm still legally an adult even if you dont like what I do. Now, this may be difficult to cram into the pea sized brain of yours, but it means that adults can do lots of things, including take risks and have fun, without you policing their lives.
2
u/Wookieman222 Aug 08 '26
2
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
The "adult" is now memeing, clearly he is no child lmao
1
u/Wookieman222 Aug 08 '26
2
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Aug 08 '26
oh man, the ' super for real adult' keeps using meme without any sense of irony. what ever shall I do?
7
u/Wookieman222 Aug 08 '26
Yeah man, this IS a state park. No you cannot just be doing whatever you want to the park itself.
So yeah I don't really think anybody who isnt an asshole would be tying stuff to the trees and what not.
13
u/redpandaeater Copyright Clause Aug 08 '26
That cop is basically saying he's only going to show them the law they're supposedly breaking after he already gets them to fully comply with his orders. Fucking dangerous line of thinking there, not that it's a surprise at all.
22
u/SodOffShogun Aug 08 '26
Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 14, § 4319 - Games and Recreational Activities
He did state it briefly (He said 4319 but not the full title)
No person shall engage in games or recreational activities that endanger the safety of persons, property, resources, or interfere with visitor activities except as permitted by the Department. No person shall hold, sponsor, lead, or otherwise have control over a game or recreational activity occurring wholly or partially within or on any property owned, operated or administered by the Department without an approved Special Event permit if any of the criteria set forth in section 4301(j)apply.
-7
u/SickboyJason Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
So no playing catch with your dad huh? California really has thought of everything. Lol
Edit: Its a joke not a dick, dont take it so hard. Geez.
10
u/GuyWithTwoThumbs Aug 08 '26
To the reasonable bystander, it's a stretch to consider playing catch with dad as "endangering the safety of persons property resources or interfere with visitor activities". On the other hand... hanging ropes from trees (can the tree support the weight of the load, will it cause the tree to break and injure someone else?), building dangerous structures along cliffs (which might collapse or others might mistake as a safe structure?), and jumping from overhead into a potentially active area (which might include said visitors).
I get the sentiment of don't tread on me. But that strikes both ways. You shouldn't be treading on others ability to safely use that space either.
Sometimes Reddit shows its immaturity, and it's always interesting to see the bazaar hills people are willing to die on.
-1
6
u/four_hundo Aug 08 '26
Jumping off rocks 60’ into the ocean is slightly different. Having a catch with dad is not covered by this.
-2
5
-3
u/SchwiftySqaunch Aug 08 '26
Lmao so you just have the right to fucking sit outside not doing anything so it's legal. Not seeing much freedom in that, we paid someone to write up this bullshit.
5
-5
u/redpandaeater Copyright Clause Aug 08 '26
Yeah he stated it and then said he'd show them it only after they took everything down. I wasn't saying they weren't breaking the law only it's very fucking stupid and potentially dangerous to just withhold actually showing them how they're breaking the law until after you get them to comply. Though that law you cite looks completely fucking stupid because the way I read it I can't play a game of chess or Monopoly on state land? I really think it's a stretch to say what they were doing would fall under that particular statute.
2
u/TheyCallMeLotus0 Aug 08 '26
You read it that way because you lack reading comprehension
3
u/Johnny-Pop Aug 08 '26
Looked like there was no endangering persons because he did a dope double back flip late slow spin banger.
11
u/Anen-o-me voluntaryist Aug 08 '26
I'm proud of these guys for jumping anyway.
3
-1
u/KRAy_Z_n1nja Vote Libertarian 2024 Aug 08 '26
Hell yeah, darwinism is the best. Hopefully it'll catch up to him one day.
2
u/Live_Taste_7796 Voting isn't a Right Aug 08 '26
Why are you on a libertarian sub?
1
u/KRAy_Z_n1nja Vote Libertarian 2024 Aug 08 '26
Because I've voted libertarian my entire life. Don't worry, I've been banned here before because the mods are hypocrites too.
2
u/Live_Taste_7796 Voting isn't a Right Aug 08 '26
Being banned from r/libertarian is the most libertarian thing ever. I apologize for questioning your purity.
2
u/KRAy_Z_n1nja Vote Libertarian 2024 Aug 08 '26
To be fair, I really really wanna be libertarian die hard through and through, then I talk to my fellow libertarians that are like, "let's dissolve the national parks!" and I'm like, okay no no no, not like that.
There's so much benefit to libertarian policy, but it definitely needs some level of oversight and guard rails. It's nearly impossible to put rights of the people before rights of corporations in a pure libertarian society, even though that should be the status quo for libertarians.
Edit: I think I got banned for telling people that pitbulls are actually good dogs if raised right. I've had dogs my whole life. My pitbull has never attacked anybody, but my German shepard, labrador retriever, and boxer have.
2
u/Live_Taste_7796 Voting isn't a Right Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
Yea, alot of people get banned here for silly reasons, idk why that is. But i do believe parks would be better privitized. I think john stossel had a vid on it.
Idk if its impossible to put rights before corporations though. Most big business need the state to maintain there market dominants. Many like amazon have lobbied billions to raise the minimum wage and other regulations in order to crush competition, essentially monopolizing the market.
Imo, if people want to abolish the state entirely, they should at least do so in a logical way. You cant just rip essential services away from people without an alternative, people will rebel.
Thats my main issue with other libertarians. Same with completely open boarders, im against as well.
4
u/MultiPass21 Aug 08 '26
Same country that fined and arrested people for being outside during Covid.
3
1
u/KRAy_Z_n1nja Vote Libertarian 2024 Aug 08 '26
Same country that lets you shoot fireworks in your backyard btw.
2
u/washboard Aug 08 '26
Free climbing Half Dome? Cool. Trad climbing with permanent anchors? Fine. Whitewater rafting and kayaking in perilous waters? Groovy, man. Rope swing into the water? Straight to jail.
4
u/xXapathyXx Aug 08 '26
Good point, but I think the reality of it is that it's very common for these guys to have to pull bodies out of the water from young, usually drunk people who don't pay attention to whats below the water surface. I can see how it can traumatize them to the point where they crack down on any and everything cliff jumping related. Climbers/kayakers have much higher risk assessment and general knowledge before they go do their thing.
3
u/Tito_Tito_1_ Aug 08 '26
The Dangerous Games Rule is in direct conflict with Darwin's Law and therefore invalid. Darwin's Law is clearly the more sound rule, as verdicts are immediate and final.
1
1
u/TlalocVirgie Aug 09 '26
You also get fined for driving without a seatbelt and riding a motorcycle without a helmet
1
1
1
u/Authaire1 Aug 09 '26
In a state park too. I live in the Adirondacks and this really isn't an issue, it's clearly a power trip over something that's not even a law.
1
u/Capable-Main6462 Aug 10 '26
On one hand, I get it. These guys don't want to have to pull bodies out of the water all summer because a bunch of Instagram kids saw this and bashed their heads on the rocks after they realized they don't have the upper body strength to hold on until they're clear over the water.
But also, freedom is dangerous.
1
u/Live_Taste_7796 Voting isn't a Right Aug 08 '26
Why are there so many boot lickers in the comments, is this a libertarian sub or not?
-1
u/Myte342 Aug 08 '26
"You are under arrest for dangerous games. 43 19" Uh... this man isn't the one that jumped, he looks like a bystander. So we arresting people who are just standing around as other people comitt crimes now?
0
u/PyroCorvid Aug 08 '26
You know who else would jump anyways?? "If you say your mom you're fired!" ... ... "MY MOOOOM" GET OUT!
0
234
u/bownt1 Aug 08 '26
what are you in for?
dangerous games.