The law is not a consequence of the state

Property rights are established when someone uses force to protect a particular area or object. This means that property rights are always concerned with the opinion of people with regard to whom has the 'right' to occupy a space or have use of an object. The government is often asked to intervene when there is a property dispute such as a burglary. But it is an illusion to think that without the government there would be no property rights. After someone has been arrested for a crime (such as burglary) they may go to gaol or they may be released. It is clear to most people (certainly in 'developed' countries) that the government is far more lenient towards criminals than the average person would be. The people at large are perpetually frustrated by the government when it comes to matters of justice. The government intervenes to prevent an escalation of violence (which has its merits) but too often the end result is that there is no justice at all and the offender is released without consequence. In an anarchist system there would be no government to intervene in the dispersement of justice and people would not be able to violate property rights so easily. The government is a detriment to property rights because it prevents people from protecting themselves. If criminals are released there is no rule of law... as there would be in an anarchist system (criminals would not be released prematurely). Government is a detriment to the law.