Ok, so I am gathering your point of view a bit more clearly now. You will likely fit in well here. There are plenty of other anarchists here.
While I don't believe in the need of government, overall, the idea of government is not something that I disagree with. There are too many people who have their own levels of morality that are much lower than yours and mine. As such, those individuals need to be dealt with "by force" more often than not.
Do you believe that a person should be allowed to murder whoever they please just because they feel that way? What if someone felt slighted, but they were not physically injured, someone simply made them feel like less of a person, and responded by killing the person who made them feel like less of a person. Is that justified?
There are two sides to a coin and there is always a balance of power that needs to be maintained. You seem to be discussing a theoretical world; although one can validly argue that the "war on drugs" has disproportionately imprisoned black males, some of which were for non-violent and minor offenses. And there are other examples along the same lines where single groups were selected to be less desirable and therefore were targeted by a law or governmental policy.
I personally am more responsible (in general) than 90% (or more) of the people who I know. However, from the list of people who I know and may be less personally responsible (in general), who are more capable and experienced in areas that my skills are lacking. I am not better than these other individuals and they are not better than me.
..Where am I going with this...
The whole idea of government, in my opinion, is to provide general "legal" (as opposed to moral) guidelines for SOCIETY. Society is an ugly place. Especially modern society. Everyone is out to make the world a better place for themselves. That type of environment is not ideal for the continuation of modern existence.
In order to advance our species, we created this modern society with rules and boundaries. Are all of the boundaries and rules the right ones? Probably not. Do most of them point us in the right direction? So far, so good. You really need to look at this from a longer term view than current society. Short term changes are just that, short-term. Long Term Goals and Achievements are the focus.
Now, what does long-term mean? 10 years? .. 20? .. 50? I'd say closer to 100 years. If we compare our society today vs 100 years ago, which is better? If we compare 100 years ago with 200 years ago.. again, which is better?
How did we get to where we are today? We were led by our rules and guidelines that were implemented by governments around the world.
Could we be in a better place with a different form of government and leadership? Most likely.
Would we be in a better place if we didn't have government at all? Probably not.
Interesting, thanks again for the response. It seems that you are what one might call a 'minarchist', someone who believes in small, non-interventional government.
I understand your point about the bottom line of force when defending rights. What if I told you that having no rulers doesn't mean having no rules?
No, of course I don't believe that crimes shouldn't go unpunished. A principle of anarchy is called the Non-Aggression Principle, which works in conjunction with the Self-Defence Principle. These state, simply put, that one should not initiate violence against another person. However, if one has violence committed against them, they have the right to defend themselves.
The crux of this argument - that government is required to provide force - is dispelled with the statement that everything the government provides can be done privately. Police forces would be accountable directly to their communities or they would be replaced, this is incentive to be a much better force than the unaccountable system of policing we have now.
Security can (and is currently, by private security forces) be provided without government. I would ask you; can you name one service the government provides that cannot be achieved on a voluntary basis privately, rather than using coercion?