Actually, it was your second sentence that caught my attention ...

Ah, okay. I misunderstood because you posted under Warren’s comment, rather than starting a new comment thread by clicking on the “Add new comment” link right under the post. Being able to keep differing conversations separate under a single post is one of the things I really like about the Drupal CMS ... but it is sometimes complicated by people who don’t notice it or take advantage of the capability.

... there seemed to be an assumption there that the jury was somehow a part of the state, and while that is so at present, unless thinking individuals wisely make other arrangements, I thought it worthwhile to set forth some alternatives that have worked in other times.

I can see where someone might make that assumption given my words; and I appreciate your efforts to make it clear that a jury system likely was and can again be a valuable part of a voluntary community. I was speaking specifically of the jury system we now have; and seeing as how it is part of the justice system designed to enforce the entirely-too-numerous laws of this land, I only have respect for it to the degree that the built-in check on judicial power and abuse is exercised. It isn’t exercised nearly enough these days. I hope your and others’ efforts to educate about jury nullification is successfully changing that.

I used to think it would be a really interesting job, to be a Heinleinian witness ... but then I realized that no individual can be that unbiased. Still, the notion of private justice (to use a common shorthand) has a lot of appeal for me.