When spanking and other issues are debated by libertarians, someone invariably brings up the issue of grabbing or touching someone in other contexts: for example, if you see a child or stranger about to run into traffic or into the path of a speeding bus, you might grab them to save them. Or you might have to grab or physically prevent a child from doing something harmful like sticking their hand into boiling water, and so on; you might even need to slap them to get their attention in an emergency situation. In these cases the third party is not trying to damage or punish or discipline the stranger or child; from it.
For defenders of spanking, they will mindlessly trot these non-analogous situations out in an attempt to justify spanking.
Opponents of spanking will say that if you manhandle the child or stranger to save them or prevent them from harm, you can hope that the “victim” of your “aggression” will forgive you.
This is confused too. It is not aggression to intervene like this because we presume the stranger implicitly consents, as most people want to helped in such cases. Same with the good samaritan who helps an unconscious stranger, e.g. someone who has had an accident or heart attack, and so on. The law quite appopriately recognizes this with Good Samaritan laws, and so on. Louisiana has the negotiorum gestio:
Art. 2292. Management of affairs; definition
There is a management of affairs when a person, the manager, acts without authority to protect the interests of another, the owner, in the reasonable belief that the owner would approve of the action if made aware of the circumstances.
yeah well if you want to live in a community where people who use common sense to help people in dire siituations might face criminal punishment, leave me out of it. The law always allows people to use their common sense judgment when needed e.g. in self-defense, negotiorum…
— Stephan Kinsella (@NSKinsella) August 11, 2025
