You're right, just stand up to the armed private security and you get to keep your property easy. Man I wonder why organizations don't just go door to door issuing not quite illegal threats to people to get them to give over property or else. Some kind of racket, a protection racket if you will. It's the individual's fault for not knowing their rights.
In your own home? Yeah, shutting your door on them isn't hard. Or don't open your door. Having a ring camera, etc. Literally call the cops. All of these would have worked. The second you know they are working for WOTC, their physical threat level goes
way down.
Shit, he could have given the property away, then lawyered up, and sued and got a settlement by lying about what they did to intimidate him. But by making a youtube video about it, he lost even that.
Still haven't heard from you how big corporations ability to intimidate and rob people is a requirement to current social order. Just insults about how childish it is.
No, see, I want you to write a law that
actually bans this
without stopping settlements happening or other huge social problems. You are the one positively claiming that the law can be changed. Tell me how.
Look, the way I see it, any enforceable banning of this also bans a lawyer representing a client with cancer from using the threat of suing Monsanto to obtain a settlement.
As for the physical intimidation, it's used
because its hard to prove. They basically appear and are innately threatening because they are armed men. Banning people from appearing threatening sounds like a great excuse to ban open carrying and some concealed carry as well.
There simply is no free lunch, only tradeoffs, in government policy. For how rare this action is, and how the solution is just to say no, I don't think a law that will have negative consequences is worth it.
The reason why I called it childish? Because every legal system will always have a grey area, and that grey area is needed because there are going to be good behaviors and bad behaviors that look very similar. That you think the law could be perfect is something only a child should believe.
Also, tbc, this isn't me saying "but they didn't violate the NAP". They did. They used deceit and an implied threat of force to grab something that wasn't theirs. I'm just saying I don't see a remedy for it