Consider these comments:
Quite interesting question. If the property owner sets the rules he could state that he who drinks the last beer must buy the next 24 pack under threat of an ass whooping. But does the property owner even have to disclose this rule before inviting guests over? How far can they go? Or is there some sort of rules that come along with it. This is an interesting subject. If the rules are not communicated prior to entry, I do not think they can be reasonably enforcedNow in a PPS the owner would have the say for his own rules on his own property but why would this lead to people wandering on to properties all over the place where the rules aren't defined in advance?
How do you communicate your rules? How do you adjudicate something not communicated? Do you post a sign with your rules? Do you establish some area where any and all comers can enter to read your comprehensive set of rules?
From one of the posts Wenzel made, it sounded like we should just know the rules somehow, magically. Since he did say that someone on their own property has the right to photograph someone else on their property while in the bathroom without their knowledge or consent. Seems like we have to figure out the rules after we have broken them.
If the rules and privacy invasions are written into a contract that the person entering the property must sign prior to entry, that would make the most sense. Before going to Bobs for Superbowl Sunday, be sure to read his rules. Don't want to eat the last hot link and get murdered or have your children have their pictures taken while changing for the pool.
I'm just being a pest. I do agree with a PPS for the most part. American's today are becoming pretty petty people. There was a story about a new property owner building a cinder block wall onto the driveway of his 90 year old neighbor. How would such disputes be taken care of in a PPS? A 3rd party arbitrator? Isn't that like a smaller version of a state? What if one side refuses to arbitrate? Things can get sticky very quickly unless all of the outliers are considered.
Presumably, people would sign up with a protection service that has very clear rules of dealing with situations that are not insane (otherwise who would sign up?). Indeed, I would expect that security services would pretty much compete on how much coverage their sane operating rules cover---not much different from the way cell phone companies now compete on the fact that they cover 90% plus of the US.
Why wouldn't a security firm compete along the same lines?
"Hey, between our own security teams and security firms we have aligned with our sane rules of behavior cover 90% of the entire country. Download our app and we will send out an alarm if you come within in a mile of an area that is not covered by our Aligned Sane Protection Service/"
Entrepreneurs solve problems. They don't sit on logs and say. Gee, how will we ever know what is safe? This is going to be so confusing?
If these are the concerns of security customers. then security firms will compete to offer solutions to these concerns. The PPS is not a government body where rules are dictated and entrepreneurial spirit is suffocated. The PPS is about letting the entrepreneurial spirit run free.