I did not ignore your response, but had not seen it because of my carelessness. I apologize for appearing to ignore it.
I did not say that "according to anarchism, it is immoral to have authority over someone." What I did say is plainly visible in my post. It seems you have been exposed to some confusing materials written by people who would be considered to be crazy or joking by any serious anarchist or any person who actually knows what anarchism is. In this case, the misunderstanding stems from those materials. No anarchist I have ever read would say that it is "fine" for a serial murderer to go on doing what they are doing. The simple reasoning is that the victims have a right not to have their lives ended for some crazy reason, and that restraining the murderer is necessary to protect those people. If you want to see it this way - the murderer is grossly violating the victim's rights to be alive. In other words, a pretty common attitude towards murder, though maybe with slightly different vocabulary.
"Anarchism" is not chaos and it is not exactly lawlessness, and "anarchism" is not a synonym for any of the senses of the word "anarchy."
If you wish to learn more about anarchism, I suggest you turn to Wikipedia or a good encyclopedia or a primer on anarchist thought that you can get at or through your local library. It is not a good idea to rely on materials like the ones you've been exposed to.
None of this means, again, that I am promoting this school of thought. There is just a misunderstanding on this thread about what that school of thought (which is, of course, varied) even is. That is why I spoke up and that is all I have to say.
I agree with
@~Anastasia~ that this might be an interesting topic - but I have a feeling it would needs a new thread and not on TAW. I would happily check out that thread if someone starts it.
@Jackson Cooper, I am sorry if my carelessness or lack of skill made my post seem like an attack on you or anyone on this thread. May God bless your search for truth.