Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While I am a supporter of vigilante justice, one has to be very careful of how it's applied. When I lived in smaller east Oregon towns, it was an appropriate system and I have helped "place" people in box cars for a "trip". But I would never do this in Portland. Here I would just report it to the police. One has to adopt to their surroundings.
Interesting thread. I have a bit of a complicated view of it.
As an example, a former coworker of mine went to prison for 20 years for murder. He was a smart guy, worked in Finance, had a good paying job, wife and kids.
His son grew up to be a drug user and became addicted. When he owed a drug dealer $80k and couldn't pay him, the drug dealer tortured him, cut off several of his fingers, broke his legs, etc... and told him he had 1 month to figure out how to pay him back or he would come back and kill him.
So the son went to his dad, my coworker, for help, to pay him off. Well, he didn't have the money either, nor did he want to pay the guy off, he knew his son would probably get right back into the same kind of trouble. So he set up a meeting with the drug dealer and then shot and killed him to protect his son. He was willing to go to jail to protect him, and he figured he was doing the world a favor by getting at least one bad person off the streets who wouldn't be able to get another kid addicted to drugs.
Now of course, the police had been consulted right at the start. But they couldn't do anything. The dealer could be brought in for questioning, but unless he outright admitted that he attacked my coworker's son, there was nothing they could do or charge him with. The best they could do was file a restraining order against him, but we all know just how well that would work in a case like this.
So a father went to prison because the law could do nothing to protect his son.
In that particular case... I have to say that I understand and condone his actions. Ideally of course, the son would have taken care of his own mess, or killed the drug dealer himself, but that didn't happen. And for a parent (which is what a lot of posters are talking about in this thread) if your child is harmed, then if justice isn't served, most of us are ok with taking action ourselves.
For me, I have a little girl. If she were ever raped or killed, I would wait and see how the courts handled it. If the perpetrator was found guilty, sentenced to an appropriate punishment, then I would live with that. But if justice wasn't served, then yes, I would step in myself, whatever the consequences to me would be.
That's crazy, I wonder what people expect someone to do in a situation like that? How did the rest of his family take it?
No I do not think Vigilante Justice is always bad but it is seemingly done by overzealous idiots. Stay with me here...
As some have mentioned in areas with adequate legal justice systems and a strict adherence to consistent application of the law (equality under the law) with a record of incarcerating those found guilty of egregious offenses it is probably rarely if ever desired by victims or needed.
Now what a community agrees is a reasonable penalty for each respective offense is something that really does (IMO) need a good dialogue. Many times you will read of bizarre penalties for non destructive crimes to other human beings but the perp is penalized for longer term etc... than perps committing far more heinous crimes. These tend to revolve around procedural technicality which defense lawyers often do excellent job of finding the one thing to exclude evidence (one way or the other) that would often lead to stiffer penalties / longer incarceration / and plead down.
An underlying issue in the justice system is it really isn't about justice, as in hearing, finding, seeing everything related to the context of 'what went down', but rather each lawyer (plaintiff / defendant) working very hard at 'winning' their case.
The legal justice penal system has become like any other "industry" in seeking taxpayer dollars through validation and continuation of programs, rather than focusing on restitution to those hurt or resolving problems.
I would hope in more civilized societies that a focus would be provided on front end of formative years to steer those straying in behavioral interaction to be 'righted'. Instead, it seems much parental and street wisdom which 'Ukrkoz' touched upon in his comment has been negated by interfering political correctness and educational systems protecting themselves from potential liability versus making those causing the problems to be punished (e.g. a victim of bullying retaliation to bully getting suspended too etc).
Personally if every city had a "Dexter" or a U.N. Owen Judge, a la, Agatha Christie classic Ten Little Indians, I'd have no problems with it. Often 'ALL' the evidence is not available for the Justice system nor may it be allowed due to technicalities.
On the topic of neighborhood patrolling its own communities sometimes street justice (often bloody but swift) is more effective in restoring community stability than LE ever will be. The reason being the police have specific rules of engagement and have been made to be social service agent extensions who mostly clean up after the fact and document and take notes. Unfortunately, the cases publicized are usually when it is an idiot who wants to make name for himself as that serves the narrative of selling papers and stirring controversy. You will rarely see those article about a victim exacting swift justice on say a break in burglary or some other common crime which people frequently if educated and equipped handle themselves.
In many of old areas of major urban cities when organized crime ruled, there were well known rules amongst them and when offenders got out of hand they would be sent swimming with fishes etc... I say that not to romanticize it, but rather, to illustrate the clearer delineation of rules than what can often be found now in legal justice system 'industry'.
Rules like "do the crime do the time", "commit a crime with a gun you automatically serve x time" are IMO good programs and lead to less cries for Vigilante Justice. The recent spate of looting and rioting in urban areas over so called grievance against LE lead rather to free reign to theft and burglary. My father used to tell stories of instances where it was simply spelled out looters would be shot on site and order was kept. A classic example during L.A. riots in early 90s was the Korean community armed and protecting their property and guess what - lo and behold - no looting occurred in that community!
Another example to illustrate: the Republican National Convention was held this past July in our downtown. As one of the preemptive actions LE went to known leaders / organizers of attention seeking causes and spelled out to them BEFORE the event what the repercussions and consequences would be. As well as purposely segregated those factions known to be at odds. This to me is ideal policing - some may call it intimidation or restricting free speech. I call it smart policing. The end result - only 22 arrests over 4 days with thousands of individuals of various protest groups.
Of course, a superior show of force is very effective (but is not tolerable nor affordable in many municipalities). Yet, the USA could save probably millions simply using Israel's Airport security setup (with armed national guard troops) rather than the Homeland Security 'grow the government employment program' we've had since early 2000's. Note, I am against the militarization of the police and wish they would all be given better training at de-escalation.
And there's an absence of statistics which we may never know and that is: how much vigilante justice has been meted out by a family of loved ones violated etc... that we never hear about?
See, when you see the news report on some killing or assault, often times we don't think about whether the individual dispatched or injured may have deserved it (Public Service to the greater community). I am not encouraging it but readily understand how it may occur. Especially when culprit is caught in the act.
Another problem with "Vigilante justice" as portrayed by Hollywood is the glorification of violence and comic book approach like Boondock Saints. Sometimes they portray it realistically like The Phenix City Story (1955), the original Walking Tall with Joe Don Baker, or the unpleasantness of violence like A History of Violence or vigilantism gone awry Magnum Force. The dilemma of vigilante justice was shown well in Criminal Minds episode, The Road Home.
I can certainly understand the desire of some people under certain conditions where they have been wronged and the justice system has not ensured that the perpetrator has received commensurate punishment to avenge their loved one. I could feel the passion that would make someone want to do that but I am not sure I would actually be able to do it myself. If the crime were severe enough and it was obvious who had done it, I doubt I would be outraged if someone else decided to take care of the 'problem'.
However, if it were up to me to take that in hand, I could probably do no more than wish for a swift and nasty natural karma to befall someone who caused someone I loved much pain or physical harm, or even death. When my sister was killed by a drunk boater, I was mad enough at that man that I had to make sure I never visited where he lived because I was not sure I could trust myself. The guy got a slap on the wrist for a DUI on land the week before and then driving a boat drunk that killed my sister as she swam in the bay - he was going too fast, was erratic and was found to be well under the influence and he was not a young kid out for a joyride - this guy was 45 years old and a professional (veterinarian). The worst thing was he refused to say he was sorry - and that hurt my parents deeply (me too of course, but, I hurt as much for them as for myself). I was also mad at the 'justice system' itself mind you .. and at his lawyer .. who ensured that the first case (the DUI on land) came to court 2nd so in effect the guy got away with 2 first offenses. I spent years after that hoping that something nasty happened to him or his family so he could feel what we felt.
I don't condone vigilante justice, but I understand why some people might choose to resort to it in extreme circumstances.
I most certainly understood why Mr Bronson did it in his movie DEATH WISH!! (The cops wouldnt get involved and HE WAS PERSONALLY AFFECTED (His family))
The cops knew what was going on and they just told him to please leave town so they wouldnt have to arrest him,etc..........
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
