I think dismal's problem is that he doesn't know the difference between conservative humor and actual humor.
Most humor, that's funny, involves an impossibility. One has to surprise a laugh out of people.
Privatized police could never operate if their own cars required quarter slots to operate. No one's saying that libertarians want such cop cars. The OP is taking real libertarian ideals (or the ideals, stated policies, of SOME libertarians) to an unrealistic, absurdist extreme for the purpose of humor.
When the very conservative joke, they tell each other much the same things they believe anyway. There's no surprise. There's not really any humor. They say 'i was joking' at the end, but the response they're looking to get has been called 'clapter.' It's not laughter, ha-ha. It's when you nod your head in agreement and hoot/holler/clap.
The blue-collar comedy tour gets a lot of that. They get the same response for telling an anti-feminist joke as they get for just saying 'I'm from Atlanta.' Nothing wrong with it, unless you can't tell the difference.
So when someone offers libertarian-flavored absurdity, dismal is not equipped to interpret it. He thinks that the joke teller is seeking clapter, and if dismal thinks it's inaccurate (as all absurdity is), then it's 'not funny.'
I get the same thing with the 'how many (fill in the blank christain sects) does it take to change a light bulb?' joke. People will laugh at the Catholic, Charismatic, Mormon and Megachurch punchlines, but suddenly grow cold and say 'That's not how Campus Crusaders think, asshole. You're not as funny as you think you are.'