what is the limit of your own personal justice

I was recently reading a thread in which some of us opted for a "cold" approach to dealing with an unjust situation....one in which the "legal" path to justice was stalled and had become frustrated by bureaucracy.

I am not a person to condone violence for 99% of situations....but I have a limit to my more noble ideals...in the end I recognize I am a human dealing with humans....not a saint dealing with flawless people and institutions.

Vigilantism.....is it completely wrong?
In the past....say the 1950´s.....if you saw a kid getting beat up you would jump in and stop it....if you saw a kid putting graffiti on a wall you scolded him without fear of his parents turning on you or being sued for harassment...
now if you tell a person to stop doing something social accepted as wrong...society will turn on you.....even in some cases if you are Law Enforcement.....what has changed?

I argue that we have become a society that defends legalism over truth.....logic over rational thought.....we have become hypocritical in that we say a person should go to prison as his "punishment" instead of not punishing him...but rather coldly just taking him from this world so as to actually end suffering in a real way.....as it is that some people have not the slightest want of reason or understanding....to "punish" them is almost just as sadistic....just end the pain IMO

those people that truly want to see it all burn.....what do you do with them? lock them up forever because they need punishment....in case they want to repent......what if they don't want forgiveness, but instead want freedom so as to do the most damage before they go.....those that want to take as many of us down with them as possible....do we keep them around until they die of old age.....like shooting a deer and watching it die slowly instead of just ending its suffering.....is not mercy for the innocent.....is not justice for righteous? why do these people deserve our unending support of their "rights".....why.?

In a hypothetical situation you are faced with the son of the president....he commits an act of rape in front of you....knowing he will not be caught because all evidence is cleaned up before you as well as knowing he will do it again. you are the only witness to the crime....what do you do?.....is your inaction actually an act of justice by not "breaking" the law and exacting justice on your own or by you and your peers....?

are you really serving the spirit of law when the law itself cannot be the one to do what's right.....like an activist or a hactivist group taking the spirit of truth and doing what's correct....instead of doing what's legal......what's the difference?

Law is a concept of mans design. In nature if you act in away harmful to the pack you are bumped off, Personally Id stab someone to death. Even if it were a 16 year old kid......

that raises another issue....what age is the limit of innocence for a person.....should a 15 YO be treated as an adult if he commits an "adult" crime like rape or torture.....or is he just a kid......doing kids things.....

IMO he should be treated as an adult.....on a case specific basis of coaurse ....but he shouldn't get a golden ticket because he is "just a boy"

reply to post by newyorkee


We must observe too that lose of control in anger is not so disgraceful as uncontrolled appetite.For it is as if anger heard reason more or less but misheard it....like dogs who bark at a person as soon as he knocks without waiting to see if he is a friend.

reply to post by newyorkee


I say treat them as an adult. I also think heavier sentences should be in place for crimes of that nature. Like take away the rapists ability to get an erection. Torture? remove the persons thumbs and index fingers. Evil people deserve to be treated in evil ways.

reply to post by LongbottomLeaf


Sorry, but that is moronic logic. If you treat in an "evil" person in an evil way then you are just making someone create another act of evil. That would, by your logic, create an endless cycle of people treating each other evilly. The better thing would be to stop the cycle of pain and create one of the opposite.

reply to post by saroncan


yeah I tend to agree....anger is not so wrong as it is that in the end it is as valid an emotion as love for example......I laugh at all those "enlightened" people that can't even admit when they are angry....I think it would be more enlightened to accept your emotions and move past them rather than bury them in complex systems of self delusion

As good and evil are defined according to perception we have no authority to pass judgement. For those not flitting the surface: The judgements we pass when we believe them true limit our creation, a limitation which may endure generations. We are the confused species, we have been entrapped in our own illusion.

reply to post by ErroneousDylan


Ok say mother was raped and tortured youd want to love that man? You go right ahead Id kill him for you out of respect for human dignity.

reply to post by newyorkee

I really like this post mostly because I can identify with most of the thought in your op, that and I love to trip up my closed minded friends by changing scenarios with the same issue at the core. But there are a couple of things I feel like you are romanticizing. In the 1950s, if you saw a group of kids fighting, you let them fight it out. Rarely would someone intervene unless it was boys vs girls. In the 1950s, if you saw a kid marking up public property, you scolded them and then told their parents who scolded them further. Communities were more tight knit in those times, but punishments for kids were a lot more brutal.

As for legalism over truth, I dont really understand what you are saying here. Logical thought has to be rational thought. I dont understand how it would be logical to kill all offenders. Not all crimes are the same. Prisons are supposed to be places of rehabilitation. But if someone gets life for a really horrendous crime, I would feel better knowing they have to stay in one building for the rest of their lives personally. But that is because I dont believe in an afterlife. So death is the easy way out in my opinion.

If the son of the president was going around raping women, I honestly would not care. There is nothing I would be able to do to prevent him from doing it, unless he eventually got caught. My course of action would be to help women who were victims of his crime. Rape and murder are not equal in the amount of harm they cause. You can recover from rape, you cannot recover from death. I might be tempted to cut off his penis though.

Most of the time, the law is on the same page as society. That is how laws are created, discarded, and changed. Outside of the death penalty, I am usually with the criminal justice system in cases where they do what they are supposed to do. For example, the Casey Anthony case. Sure people thought she was guilty but there was no evidence to support that. Therefore she was let go. I could not in good conscience be happy to see someone punished because I "thought" they were guilty.

reply to post by acmpnsfal


well you are correct in my romanticizing the 50´s...I tend to do that....as far as the boys fighting....yup again my romantic ideas of civil order...but I think they would if he was getting the crap kicked out of him by more than one person.....not a 1 on 1....

and I also want to note that I don't advocate doing things based on what you "think" is correct...like if I am almost certain you did something.....I could then go and act on that.....but if I know you are guilty because the courts have proven it beyond the shadow of a doubt....and yet you get off on a technicality.....I would be tempted to act if given the chance.....

I also want to clarify that what I mean about arguing "legality" over truth, common sense over logic....is that while something can fall into the laws definition of illegal.....that same definition may not always be aligned with what publicly and commonly is societies sentiment.....we don't like murder....yet 90% of us think about it when we see people like ted Bundy....like you didn't really say to yourself...."I would just xxxx that guy"

reply to post by newyorkee


sorry I am taking so long....I am currently at work(coffee shop) and I am reading typing and talking about it with my customers at the same time.....lol

Hmmm law and justice - 2 very different things in my opinion
As for vigilantes - as things stand at the moment in first world countries especially the west I believe this to be inevitable as people become more and dissatisfied with tptb and a legal system that seems to be devoid of sense, that allows criminals to walk free on technicalities, where punishments are in no way fitting of the crime and prisons have become country clubs where criminals are sent and refine their trade - a sort of criminal training camp
More and more people are going to take JUSTICE into their own hands - hey I've already considered it .......and still from time to time
People reminisce about the 50's 60' and 70's but look at the society that was slapping theses scallywags upside the head
It was post ww2 ideaology was in a different place and becose of the war the people including the people that had served had that mind set but also ultimately the training and expirience to facilitate such neighbourhood justice
And this power of the people continued no no small part in my belief becouse of civil service from the populous ( the conscription, national service or what ever went on near you )
This has changed now that little extra bit of discipline and the will and strenght to enforce it has over time eroded away
But as I've said the vigilantie will come back with vengeance
There's been 20 years now of western soldiers and reservists going to war in an urban counter insurgency role and have become very focused on that role
All these veterans once again in general circulation ......something's gonna happen
People with specialist, special forces, urban combat and 'the enemy's within the populous' training and expirience
Are comming home and seeing how their neighbourhood has changed - or how bad it is - or are just wronged are going to apply these skills to protect theirs and their own and it'll only take a few of these vets in the same town or area to band together and hey presto
But this a double edged weapon and some places are already finding that gang members are returning home and taking their skills back to the gangs ( bloods and krips Ive read to be a problem with just this ) street gangs with members that have instructional qualifications and special forcess trainig
When I return to my home town I'm always saddened to see how it's become as a militairy man I've found that militairy camps and the personel can be very much separated from the rest of the world you don't have the geneal problems on the street on a militairy camp or housing estate, then on leaving the service you find your home town has become over run .....eventually something's gonna snap
And with the indoctrination many soldiers go through this could be a powder keg
Age wouldn't matter the training kicks in the drills take over the target is dropped could very well be the case in some cases regrettably

But then if I feel it's warranted I'll still slap a kid upside the head - but then I go lots of places where you need to drop kick 12 year olds in the tits to stop em cleaning you out not coz they need anything they just WANT
Hell the locals throw bricks and whip the little buggers
Coming to a neighbourhood near you soon ?

Sorry I suppose I should add

The limit of my own personel justice - none
If you go that far against me and mine expect it coming back
If I think you'll come back from that harder - ill make sure you can't
HONEST BELIEF if I honestly believe you pose a threat to my life or those I love care about or hey I see you pull a knife on an old lady in the street I ......in my mind am authorised to use lethal force
Again it's a soldiers thing it's drilled into you
Your peacetime default setting is lethal force is only to be used as a last resort where human life is at risk
And force must be proportional to risk - that tells me you pull a knife your threatening life - hey that's a knife - unless I pull out a gun to make you surrender or a bigger knife - you're gonna have the upper hand now I'm not gonna wait to see if your gonna stick me - or that poor old lady
I'm gonna take that knife off you and make sure your in no fit state to pose a threat - should I be unable to take that knife from you - I'm gonna make sure your in no fit state to use it
But naturally this is all very much situation dependent

I'm 100% opposed to any form of corporal punishment or retaliation, but only on behalf of a flawed human being, close to the crime or loss, say rape or murder, would I have a lot of compassion for anyone who does experience temporary insanity and react or retaliate. I think we have to realize, there but for the grace of God go I? For we can only imagine.

However, for a jury and judge far removed from the incident and in cold blood, to me thats just murder, and some kind of psuedo legality first degree. And I have far less understanding for them.

Many murders are in the heat of the moment, on the edge of reality, and for some it may be over their head to pull back, for example teenagers with hormone surges or various odd situations I have more sympathy for them and their need to heal, be counciled, be restrained, and gradually the horror as they face what they've done than for any dictator or Saturnist cold blooded legal system. Thats just evil. People are flawed alright, but the world around them needs to operate on the highest principals and not give up on any case, ie. recovering the light in people.

In other words, I consider capital punishment and legally locking people up and throwing away the key without a merciful counseling healing system, to be more murder than most murders, which are usually in the heat of the moment.

In the heat of the moment I have more compassion for and only wish to see counseling and help for them.

"Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary."

"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence"

thank you A-team......oh yeah and Gandhi.......great movie.....great man.......

oh yeah,....and be the change.....thats what I got from ganhi´s life.....

reply to post by LongbottomLeaf


Tell me what killing him would do.

Originally posted by ErroneousDylan
reply to post by LongbottomLeaf

 

Tell me what killing him would do.

Purge a rambunctious rascal from the gene pool before he pees in it.

reply to post by ErroneousDylan


he would die.......thats all

reply to post by ErroneousDylan

Typical sheltered view on life. It would keep him from hurting someone else. And it's what any real man with any shape or form of testicles would do. You wait until someone you love is hurt and we'll see how you change.