In memory and honor of the late Norman L. Vroman, Mendocino County District Attorney. December 14, 1936 to September 21, 2006.
One of the myths repeated by the political class is that electing Libertarians to office would lead to a parade of horribles.
But as the experience of San Miguel County (CO) Sheriff Bill Masters and Mendocino County (CA) District Attorney Norman Vroman shows, life is good for citizens who elect Libertarians to protect their communities.
The county seat of San Miguel County is Telluride, Colorado. Home of the famous bluegrass festival, Telluride received a second place ranking in the "50 Best Places to Live" list in the 2002 issue of Men's Journal.
Sheriff Masters is well-known to Libertarians, and an outspoken critic of the war on drugs. His law enforcement philosophy involves trying to limit governmental involvement in our everyday lives, promoting the idea that laws should be simple and few in number, and giving people as much personal liberty as possible. But Sheriff Masters also insists that people accept full responsibility for their actions when they hurt someone or damage someone's property.
On America's West Coast, District Attorney Vroman's office in Mendocino County (PDF file) boasts increased productivity, and generated more income than it spent on operations. The Libertarian D.A. realized these achievements while fulfilling his constitutional obligation to protect the public's safety.
In his famous essay, "On Liberty," philosopher John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) stated the "no harm principle":
[T]he sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.
Or, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, if another person's behavior neither picks your pocket nor breaks your leg, you haven't suffered a sufficient harm from that person to justify retaliation.
Some local law enforcers are understandably frustrated because they recognize that, despite short-term headlines, sting operations against consensual crimes seem to generate more problems than solutions.
And there is a more serious downside to tasking law enforcement agencies with the prevention of conduct that does not directly harm others. As another Libertarian with a law enforcement background, Richard Mack, has noted: "today's law enforcement officers are overwhelmed by the demands placed upon them by special interest groups and their political enablers. As a result of these distractions, our children are at increased risk from real predators."
Sheriff Mack's observation is supported by many other commentators who also recognize that the trade-off for increased policing of consensual behavior among adults is decreased protection from assaults to our person and property (DOC file). In other words, getting tough on victimless crimes means getting soft on the criminals who produce victims.
Libertarians recognize that the incumbent parties' approach hasn't worked, nor will it work (MP3 file), and it's time to try something different.
Adapted from an essay originally published on March 2, 2006.
