When it comes to things like airport security and border crossings, I have a pretty extreme libertarian attitude in some sense: I tend to think most of it is theater, that a competent, sufficiently determined terrorist could get around whatever we put in place, and that the only reason we aren’t constantly attacked by competent, sufficiently determined terrorists is that terrorism is for losers. It doesn’t pay well, many of the most important missions are suicide missions, and the motivation for all of it is pie-in-the sky stuff that mostly appeals to idiots. I could be wrong but all of this, but I would need to be convinced.
That said, I recognize that there is probably some need for a TSA-type organization, and I would rather it be run by the government. I’d like to ask the libertarians: what, if any, evidence do they have for the idea that private companies would be held accountable more than the government is when it comes to airport security? When I say evidence, I don’t mean “beginning from Hayek’s principles….” or “the private security force on Galt’s Gulch worked great”, I mean something that happened and was documented here, on planet earth, with actual human beings (I’m not trying to be a wise ass here, just trying to be clear about the ground rules).
The best analogies for a privatized TSA I can think of would be Blackwater (I don’t claim this is a perfect analogy). Would a libertarian argue that Blackwater was held more accountable than regular soldiers in Iraq? if you can think of a better analogy, great, I’d like to hear it.
Also too: should police forces be privatized? Would that make them more accountable?
I’m failing to see the mechanism by which a private security company would be held accountable and I can think of no examples (again, I mean here on planet earth, among actual human beings) that would be make think it would be held more accountable than a government-run TSA.