Would You, Under Any Circumstances, Support Vigilantism?

Discussion in 'Serious Topics & Debates' started by The GOAT, May 29, 2015.

  1. Let's pretend for a second that there was a Bruce Wayne/Batman type of figure in the world, not necessarily an eccentric billionaire per se, but merely someone who had the means, motive, resources, and almost genius-like detective skills to go out there and hunt down criminals and obtain proof of their illegal/despicable actions. Only unlike Batman, this person's way of dealing with such people was more akin to The Punisher's, Dexter's, and Paul Kersey's (Charles Bronson's awesome character from the old Death Wish films) way of dealing with them, which was to straight up eradicate them from the earth via killing them.

    Furthermore, let's say this person only targeted the worst kind of deviants in society and didn't just go around offing people over every little thing (which is one of the main dangers of vigilantism.) Murders, rapists, terrorists, kidnappers (I consider them among the worst because their ransom demands usually involve them threatening to murder the person they've kidnapped if their demands are not met), people who rape/beat/molest children, violent drug lords and cartel leaders, etc. Basically just about anyone who seriously threatens the lives, safety, and well-being of general society.

    I know this may sound wholly implausible and a bit on the fantasy side, but try to envision for the purpose of the topic that there was someone or a group of people out there who fit this idea as realistically as possible. If such a person or if such people did exist and proved to be very effective, would you support their doings (even if it was secretly) or not?
     
  2. Absolutely, I would support it. I can't think of a compelling argument not to.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. I mean like If I didn't support it I'd be a hypocrite seeing as my alter-ego is one of the most well known vigilantes in the mid-west!

    No but in all seriousness, (ignore that because you would know too much!) I would totally support it.. but it'd definitely have to be some well-resourced person with a code of honor that doesn't just allow you to kill any criminal.
     
  4. ITT: Lockard tries to gauge interest on what the reaction would be if he tries his hand at being an IRL Batman.

    Spoiler:

    Show Spoiler

     
  5. At least I'd fare better than this poor chap:

     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. The only way I would feel like supporting vigilantism would if the system and in-place laws were so corrupt that there would be no way you could hope to have any kind of change by being a democratic goody-two-shoes. So in some cases, yeah, but I don't usually trust anyone to have ultimate control over justice, much less a emotionally invested civillian.
     
  7. Sure, why not
     

  8. That dude is famous as shit, MMA fighter turned superhero even ESPN did a documentary on him.
     
  9. If the person was like Dexter only killing other Serial Killers and shit then all to him. If the police fail, send the vigilante out.
     
  10. :nope:
    Nope.

    wk
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. lolTexas. Your vigilante problem would turn into a civil war in a month tops. Yeah i'm into vigilantism, but they have to be prepared to lose their life at some point, if not worse. There are plenty of times where people have taken the law into their hands and done things the people deserved, because they were failed by the court system. I'm not going to promote it, but certainly it makes sense why some of the retaliatory justice murders done from court cases where the prosecution failed happens and a reason the person committing that act more than most of the time ends up with a slap on the wrist compared to the life sentence.
     
  12. Only if it's Spawn
     
  13. Dexter killed plenty of people who didn't fit the code BRUH
     
  14. "It is better for 1,000 guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be hanged."

    That aphorism sums up the ethos of the American justice system.

    It is easy for us to sit here and allow emotions to guide our feeling that people who are "obviously guilty" should be punished, because it is easy to say that the guilty must be punished. The problem arises when people react with emotion rather than cold calculation when it comes to the matter of guilt vs. innocence. The idea of courts, juries, legalities, etc., is designed to remove emotion from the process.

    In vigilantism, the concept of removing emotion is negated. The vigilante responds with anger and hatred, not cold logic, as the police and courts are designed to. We've seen too often what happens when police officers and officers of the court system allow emotion to infect their actions (not to mention what happens when non-police agents do so). The only protection we have when the police or courts take such action is that the police, in the end, answer to the people and court decisions can be appealed. With vigilantes, the protection we have is that, in the end, they are criminals and should be prosecuted as such, popular opinion aside (the right things are not always popular and the popular are not always right).

    It is fun to sit around and pronounce that our justice system is failed because that's what our popular culture and much of our media (across the ideological spectrum) tells us ad infinitum. But it is a fantasy. Our justice system works most of the time and the failures are not those of the system, but those of the people who make up the system (police officers, jurists, jury members, etc.), who can never be 100% perfect as they are as human as any of us. And, for those who will throw up five or six or a dozen names of those failures, it is much like throwing out the five or six or a dozen plane crashes that happen every year as defense that flying is not a safe form of travel. You're bringing up the few exceptions, not the millions of successes that occur every day. Most of the time, the police and courts provide justice, but that's not news, therefore, it's not talked about. The exceptions are news, hence their publicity value.

    For those who would like to punish criminal offenders, I would encourage you to attend a nearby police academy or graduate college and go to law school and actually put your money where your mouth is. Rather than living your life in some fantasy world built by popular media and popular culture, try facing up to reality and living in the real world.

    wk
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  15. Yeah, there's been a recent wave of vigilantism here in Brazil. One of the earlier cases was of a petty cellphone thief getting tied up to a Wodden Pole and tortured. He was stripped naked, then had his ears and thongue cut off. After they got tired, the vigilantes just left him there. Funnilingly enough, they discovered the vigilantes that were being treated as heroes, and surprise surprise, they had a even worse criminal record than the thief they tortured, and were probably just looking to have a "just" cause for their fix of violence.

    On a more recent case, a woman was burned alive for being a supposed child rapist. Turns out it was only some false rumor spread out of spite.

    People seem to think most vigilantes are civilians with a code of honor that far resembles a crime-ridden utopia, where the innocent walk free and only the criminals have to anwser. Turns out the personal biases and assumption of guilt are as present in these people as any other human being. And then whenever someone bring this point, people shrug it off as if these innocents that are going to get killed out of ignorance and spite are merely collateral damage, just a footnote on their "greater good" mentality. It's really repulsive.

    I'd go as far to say that vigilantism is probably just one step away from straight-out honor killings.
     
  16. Sadly, everything in your post is pretty well spot-on.

    The only niggling tidbit I might disagree with is "one step away from...honor killings". I pretty much equate the two as being based in ignorance, hatred, and a desire to control others.

    As cool as Batman is, there's a reason he only exists in fiction.

    wk
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. In hindsight I can see why it would sound overly dramatic:smug:
     
  18. No, because every vigilante has their own view as to why they are doing what they do, who is good, who is bad... It would never help stabilize anything.
     
    • Like Like x 2