darkSpyro

What are your thoughts on the idea of taking the law into your own hands?

I mean... if you've got super-powers, by all means, do some good with them. Though I'd totally be a super-villain, but that's just me.

literally the plot of kick ass

i mean maybe???

Kill Pedos and Rapists

“Fly home buddy. I work alone.”

It is an existing concept that has been implemented in real life so techincally not a matter of faith and belief. But I think that it is absolutely not acceptable. When an individual takes law into one's own hands there is only one individual's observation and sense of justice in action. It is tunnel-visioned, very ill-advised and not beneficial to civil society at all.

I think that vigilante justice is fine, on the condition that they are still held accountable for their actions, IE: Assault and murder.

Example say there's some sort of serial killer or whatnot, then one of the victim's family members manages to track down and kill them. Ideally they'd turn both the body and themselves into the police. Sort of a "I know what I'm doing is wrong, but it had to be done" sort of idea, they should be fully willing to accept the consequences of what they did. If not, then they're really no better than the same criminal.

Like what I said about the death penalty earlier, I'd much rather have preventative measures in place to ensure that's not a possibility. Vigilante justice in England is, from what I've seen, rather effective; there's 'hunters' that take the place of children online to lure out sexual predators that think they're meeting with children or other vulnerable members of the public, and bring them to custody. There's no bounty, there's not really much fame to it, it's just some people doing what they believe to be good deeds. Good on them, I say.

Now when it comes to killing criminals right there and then.... that's when it's iffy, because even trained police officers and armed forces make mistakes. I saw an episode of Luther that makes the case for vigilante justice quite appealing - a rape and murder could've been committed by a gang had it not been for the vigilante blowing the living daylight out of some gangsters. There were no bobbies on the beat, so were the victims supposed to let their captors have their way and phone the Bill the following day? Doesn't sound right to me. This is why I advocate for more police officers on our streets over security cameras, or just firing them the moment an election's been won.

In said episode of Luther however, vigilante justice quickly devolved into mob mentality and that I cannot abide. It's not justice, it's bloodthirst and cold, hard revenge. It's easy to wax philosophical when you're not surrounded by a bellowing horde, frothing at the mouth while calling for the head of a once convicted and fully sentenced criminal (in this made-up, worst case scenario). It doesn't help when these individuals would probably not take action on their own out of cowardice or plain ol' respect for the law.... but when it's a mob, it's OK because everyone else is doing it right? It doesn't inspire confidence but unthinking hate. You see it with riots today; people join in not just because of what they believe in and want to oppose a threat, but to cause damage and get away with it.

So in all, I'm not a huge fan of vigilante justice but only because I'd sooner see more patrols and security measures to keep people safe.

Quote: Samius

Quote: kardonis

I think that vigilante justice is fine, on the condition that they are still held accountable for their actions, IE: Assault and murder.

Example say there's some sort of serial killer or whatnot, then one of the victim's family members manages to track down and kill them. Ideally they'd turn both the body and themselves into the police. Sort of a "I know what I'm doing is wrong, but it had to be done" sort of idea, they should be fully willing to accept the consequences of what they did. If not, then they're really no better than the same criminal.

They're no better regardless because they committed a murder. It's just one person hunting down and killing another, in a calculated act no less.

how is killing someone to end their killing spree not better than killing someone for fun

It's a slippery slope.

Quote: Lunarz

Quote: Samius

Quote: kardonis

I think that vigilante justice is fine, on the condition that they are still held accountable for their actions, IE: Assault and murder.

Example say there's some sort of serial killer or whatnot, then one of the victim's family members manages to track down and kill them. Ideally they'd turn both the body and themselves into the police. Sort of a "I know what I'm doing is wrong, but it had to be done" sort of idea, they should be fully willing to accept the consequences of what they did. If not, then they're really no better than the same criminal.

They're no better regardless because they committed a murder. It's just one person hunting down and killing another, in a calculated act no less.

how is killing someone to end their killing spree not better than killing someone for fun

You've ended Asshole #1's Killstreak!

Quote: Lunarz

Quote: Samius

Quote: kardonis

I think that vigilante justice is fine, on the condition that they are still held accountable for their actions, IE: Assault and murder.

Example say there's some sort of serial killer or whatnot, then one of the victim's family members manages to track down and kill them. Ideally they'd turn both the body and themselves into the police. Sort of a "I know what I'm doing is wrong, but it had to be done" sort of idea, they should be fully willing to accept the consequences of what they did. If not, then they're really no better than the same criminal.

They're no better regardless because they committed a murder. It's just one person hunting down and killing another, in a calculated act no less.

how is killing someone to end their killing spree not better than killing someone for fun

Exactly my thoughts. What would make someone "no better" than the criminal is to sit back and not do anything to stop them, because of some fraudulent moral claim that "being like them in any way, shape, or form is evil". Letting innocents die due to a fear of enacting justice is almost as bad as causing the injustice, if not just as.

Now, I'm not saying that people should just go out killing dangerous criminals willy-nilly, or have no faith in the law enforcement. Let them do their job. But if you have a chance to stop an injustice before it happens, take it.

k how is killing a confirmed serial killer who murdered your baby daughter not better than a person who self proclaimed himself to be killing for fun and has been caught on camera committing several murders

Quote: Lunarz

k how is killing a confirmed serial killer who murdered your baby daughter not better than a person who self proclaimed himself to be killing for fun and has been caught on camera committing several murders

This is an extremely specific situation that will likely never happen to a real person

The closest the average Joe will ever get to "vigilante justice" is deciding whether to call the cops on the dude who keyed your car, or bash his head in with a baseball bat (or something of similarly little consequence)

Quote: Samius

Quote: Waaksian

Exactly my thoughts. What would make someone "no better" than the criminal is to sit back and not do anything to stop them, because of some fraudulent moral claim that "being like them in any way, shape, or form is evil". Letting innocents die due to a fear of enacting justice is almost as bad as causing the injustice, if not just as.

Now, I'm not saying that people should just go out killing dangerous criminals willy-nilly, or have no faith in the law enforcement. Let them do their job. But if you have a chance to stop an injustice before it happens, take it.

I don't think anyone here made claims like that. You on the other hand compared inaction in the face of injustice to committing the very same injustice. Is a bystander who didn't stop a violent mugging that lead to someone's death suddenly a murderer? An accomplice maybe?

I'm just saying. People can jump through all kinds of mental hoops to convince themselves that what they're doing is right. Obviously I'm not against stopping criminals from committing crime, but you can't just arbitrate what is and isn't justice.

You make a good point, and I should have elaborated on this. If someone has the ability to stop something, and they know that law enforcement might not be able to stop it in time, then they should try. Obviously, most people won't have the ability to stop a mugging because they don't have any fighting experience, and about all they can do is call the police or gather a larger number of people to scare them off (which is unlikely considering this is most likely to happen in a dark, isolated place). All I'm saying is that if someone can actually prevent something, but choose not to under the grounds of "being like the enemy is wrong", they're putting the victim's life at risk.

Technically, no one can really arbitrate what justice is and isn't. It's an intangible, man-made concept that varies from person to person. What could be justice for one person may not for another.

That being said, I'm aware that all I've been saying is simply my own opinion, and I don't uphold anyone to these expectations. This is just my two cents on the issue.

hi i'm a vigilante and if you ever put your garbage bags into another private property's trash can i'm going to put you in the ground in the name of justice

the farting vigilante has given us all something to believe in

Quote: Lunarz

k how is killing a confirmed serial killer who murdered your baby daughter not better than a person who self proclaimed himself to be killing for fun and has been caught on camera committing several murders

this is just my two cents here...

in the example that you've given, you said that the guy was caught on camera committing several murders? because of this, the police probably have a pretty good idea of who they're going after. there is no reason for you to go out and kill someone who is killing if the police already know who it is. there are repercussions for doing that kind of thing. for example, i think you can actually be arrested for obstruction of justice. especially, if they know who the guy is.

two, if the police know who the guy is, how come you NEED to go kill the guy? actually, if you have a good idea of who it is, why do you need to kill him? can't you go to a detective point them in the right direction? like seriously, even if i believed in vigilante justice,. your example doesn't make any logical sense.

finally, as for vigilante justice, i dont believe in it, i guess. i mean unless its in self defense...

Evil is subjective

We're told to let God judge these horrible people and that we should go to authorities, not taking the law into our own hands, that we're no better than the criminals we want fight back against and bring to justice. The system can and does fail to recognise potential terrorism and go easy on criminals for destroying many lives.

While I still want to believe in justice, it's becoming harder to feel comfortable when watching authorities brutally attacking and detaining people for petty crimes and allowing hate groups to march freely.

Vigilante justice is alive in this world and includes torturing people to death for stealing. As flawed as the justice system is, it's necessary.

The Punisher is only cool in theory. I can indulge in those fantasies in comic/show form because it's made utterly clear who the bad guys are and who aren't. The world isn't a comic book. There are no Hand clan members tearing up Hell's Kitchen.

Not really a fan of it in reality, because different people have a different punishing level. IE tumblr.

There's a saying I usually think about, "If you kill 1 murderer, the amount of murderers remains the same" because even if you killed a murderer, you are now the new one because of that.