Covertly. I said covertly. As in your competitor's wards die, and no one knows who did it... But you claim it wouldn't happen under your watch.
You claim no one would patronize a business that picks fights yet drug pushers battle over territory all the time and no one cares as long as they get their drugs.
@soriano336:
Detectives.
Your next point will be that the defense contractors could have detectives too, but I hope you at least realize the conflict of interest in having employees responsible for determining their employer did nothing wrong. Literally everything that happened would be blamed on the competition...
Firstly, would you aggressively kill people under the protection of others? And how would you address these problems, if you were the manager of a defence company, or of some other company? And why is it that I've never heard of a security company deliberately breaking into the house or building of another company's client? Could it be because it just doesn't happen?
Nobody would patronize a defense company, with the job of protecting its customers, if it is picking fights which endangers its customers.
Wait... does the state stop people from "covertly" killing people now ?
@churdtzu:
What I would do has nothing to do with anything. I'm not a serial killer, but I recognize that serial killers exist. Anything less is simply delusional. What you're basically trying to state is that everyone involved in war for their own personal benefit now would magically give that up if there were no government. Which is utter bullshit. They'd just recruit their own troops and the wars would be internal between neighboring towns.
Don't believe me? Look at fucking history, there's plenty of examples of warring "kingdoms" and people attempting to take power through warfare.
Might be because the police would arrest their asses. Or because they keep it quiet. What, do you think they're going to hold a parade to announce they broke into a building protected by a rival?