[philwelch]

> As long as it's easier to take something than it is to pay for something, there will be people who take, and there will be groups that organize around taking.

One of the basic functions of the state is to make it difficult for people to steal things.

[TheRealPomax]

No isn't. It's to impose sanctions on those who steal things. They have zero involvement in making in harder to do so. Neither laws nor police make it more difficult to steal things, they merely raise the cost of doing so, and as long as that cost is less than the benefit derived from stealing things, thievery will be there to do its thing.

[philwelch]

Make it difficult for people to steal things and get away with it, then.

[TheRealPomax]

Arguably still no, that's the responsibility of the owners to help facilitate (through video surveilance, etc), mostly required by insurance. Government's role really is just the part that formalizes what the punishment is, should you get caught. Society is who decides how hard, or easy, it is to steal things.

[mattigames]

Up to a point, if the money spend into making it difficult is clearly lacking in root problems that are causing people to become criminals in the first place then other forms of governments will quickly become attractive and the likelihood to create civil unrest.