I can only defend what I say and what I believe and I'm certainly not going to waste my time defending the lunatic opinions you find about free markets by rooting around the Internet. How anything I've said leads to, encourages, or allows drunk-driving Cambodians searching for casinos to murder innocents is beyond my comprehension. How anything I've said results in a state without laws to protect against fraudsters and depravity (really? linking my views on economics to brothels in Cambodia? really?) is also beyond my comprehension. If you want to keep spending hours finding examples of man's inhumanity to man, or cunning or avarice and attaching that to the natural result of free markets, go ahead. But that will be a lonely conversation. As much as you try to equate free markets with anarchy and then challenge me to defend anarchy, I will not take up the gauntlet and defend anarchy, because I reject your assumption that free markets require a lawless, anarchic state.
I'm glad you find comfort in the State's ability to protect the powerless against the powerful and the evil. At times I share your comfort. But we both know the major crimes of man against man have been organized attempts by government to silence the rights, voices and lives of its own citizens. But, I never sense in you a fear of that power or a necessity to protect individual liberties. And I never sense in you an appreciation of how, throughout our history, the free-association of individuals gathered together organically, stopped your benevolent government from trampling on the rights of its citizenry. I'm sure you do have that appreciation, but it's just hard to see.