I have a hard time with Sam & Ian's reaction to the Michigan neighbor conflict raised on the November 9th show. Mark suggested that in the absence of any other obvious remedy the property pursue action against the motocross track in the courts.
Sam & Ian dismissed this course of action as "violence", completely ignoring Mark's salient point that the motocross track had clearly aggressed against its neighbors.
It is clear to my little minarchist brain that the motocross track has committed the tort of nuisance and should be liable for it. Perhaps Mark wasn't as clear as he could be but bringing a civil action for the tort of nuisance isn't state violence. No police would be involved, the motocross track would not be compelled to answer the complaint, ignoring it would bring nothing more than a civil judgment and a perhaps a lien.
Libertarians ought to be advocating civil actions as preference over criminal and kangaroo proceedings.
What is the problem and given the existing mechanisms what is inherently wrong with civil courts as a last resort in dispute resolution?