kurt_w wrote: I was thinking he meant that something about the "political" nature of this crime made it particularly inviting for a libertarian to choose to ignore it. That still seems wacked to me. But maybe that wasn't what Arturo meant.
Just to be clear, I'm not condoning the behavior of this jackass.
I think this should be tried as a property crime - this guy destroyed a document that belonged to someone else. It didn't belong to "the people" or any other vague entity, but rather the specific people who paid for it to be printed, or otherwise have taken ownership. They may assign whatever value to it that they like and press charges accordingly. Such a property crime shouldn't be treated differently because the political gang in charge (not R's or D's, but the entire political establishment) is offended by this particular instance of paper-ripping. In other words, this was a crime against the owner(s) of that piece of paper, not a crime against our society or democracy as a sacred, abstract concept.
kurt_w wrote:How exactly would "I don't have much respect for government authority" justify turning a blind eye to someone's extralegal use of force to strengthen the power and authority of the governor?
This goes both ways. In order to protect the challenge to the authority of the governor, you're suggesting that our obligatory recourse is to appeal to the authority of the judiciary - a part of the same illegitimate authority system. The right to petition your government is a nice thing, but it's only relevant when you have a government authority to appeal to. If you don't recognize the exclusive authority of the state to do anything, including recognize petitions, then the entire issue becomes moot.