Ask Your Question today
is it normal that i believe the killing of someone who has commited a crime such as murder,rape,and any other horrible act is right
Not sure how to vote because I would support the concept, not necessarily the practice. Many people never see justice, many times in my own life I've wished I could mete out some of my own.
But people get things wrong, all the time. Justice means nothing when stained with the blood of innocents, and you just couldn't trust most people who had the wherewithal to take these things into their own hands to actually make sure they get the right guy.
The trouble is vigilante crowds usually contain some pretty stupid people, who often get the wrong person. There have been incidents of innocent people getting murdered just because someone had started unfounded rumours about them and it spread around enough stupid people.
There was even an incident in Britain of a 'paedophile hunter' vigilante gang burning down a paediatrician's house!
speaking about looters my friends house got robbed from looters after hurricane hardy it sucks
I support vilgiantism and think if someone murders or rapes your family or friends and you fail to kill them it would be morally wrong.
I do not believe the law dictates morals and think it is important for people to take matters into their own hands.
I wonder if you'd continue to think vigilantism is a good thing if some nut was convinced you'd committed a heinous crime and decided to apply some summary justice.
Op didn't say anything about being "convinced" you'd committed a crime he's talking about people who actually did commit those crimes. So unless you're saying that you don't think murder and rape are "heinous crimes" then your logic is flawed.
Without a trial and all the facts, how would one know the person "actually" committed the crime, unless caught in the act? Even with trials people get it wrong more than we'd like to admit.
We have laws that address people being killed while a crime is being committed so that doesn't qualify as vigilantism, which is post fact.
But no one said it was "without trial and facts", so your logic is flawed. "How would one know"? Umm, by witnessing it? Why are you assuming the post has anything to do with the legal system?
how do you know the verdict of the trial was right? The legal system is extremely corrupt and really only cares about putting on a show and seeing which side comes out winning than actually finding if someone is guilty or innocent.
You shouldn't be taking the law into your own hands.
In my mind the justice system isn't a place for your sick revenge fantasies; it is for delivering justice and (if we could get our sh*t together) reforming criminals so that it doesn't happen again (assuming they don't get 30+ years in prison.)
In the U.S., the states that deliver the death penalty the most and have harsher sentencing DON'T have the lowest crime rates. Texas, for example, has one of the largest crime rates and gives out the most executions. Killing criminals doesn't stop other people from doing it too.
The fact is, killing people doesn't help anyone, so it is worthless to support vigilantism.
The is no "justice" system in America. There is a corporate, for profit incarceration system. It's built to get people into the system and never let them escape it. It's increadibly effective at making money for certain groups of people, but it does not even attempt to deliver justice any more.
That much is obvious, but how is vigilantism going to help that? It won't.
What we should be doing is trying to reform the prison system and model it after countries that have their sh*t together. Make it harder for corporations to profit off of systems that clearly shouldn't be private.
It's actually getting easier, slavery isn't outlawed for incarcerated people because "hard work" is viewed as a positive way to reform people back into society. A corrupt system like that is going to want to keep as many of its slaves as possible.
Which is why legislation needs to target corporations. Then again, that will probably never happen here because (of course) the American people don't understand the most basic aspects of it's corrupt system.
I don't have much hope that the criminal system will actually reform criminals so they may reenter society.
Anyway, I'd like to see a murderer confront another murderer for murdering
Based on my own experiences with police and with vigilante justice, the latter is always fairer and more reliable. Don't rely on the police coming if you're actually in danger, call friends or family instead.
Holy Shit!! Thank you for all the votes and comments i didnt expect to get so many , I thought I would get like 10 or mayble 12.
so, these three guys were being crucified by jews, i bet you were thinking i was going to say muslims , and one says to the other , save use , use your super jesus powers , and the guy says nope, you both die , you can go to hell , and your spirit can party with me. that Jesus dude was pro death penalty , no fucking doubt about it.
When did I say I went to community college either? Yet you still assumed as much. LOL
-brags about having taken logic 101 in community college
-later uses it as an insult
Loool I think the dementia is setting in you old bastard
Imo the only act worse that an individual can do than commit violence is to do so with full understanding that violence us wrong. Vigilantism is scummier than murder and no it doesn't make the world a better place
vigilantism is not more scummier than killing in innocent human being dumbass
im against violence against an innocent person , but im not against violence of a criminal :D
The words criminal and innocent do not effect the sanctity of human life. Both are equal beings.
I've committed crimes and I dare say you have too. Are you suggesting we deserve violence?
"Criminal" is a go-to word to demonise somebody as a dangerous, scary person. Some people still believe the kindergarten curriculum version that the world is a comic book and only the "good guys" stand between "Criminals" who are wholly evil people who do bad things just to be mean.
I feel the same way about prisons and military intervention, these all tend to increase crime
It is necessary to shoot all vigilantes on sight for the government to retain authority. If you are clever enough, you might get away with a summary execution or two. But the people of my county didn't elect you. I look forward the justice system brutally executing you should you act on your impulses.
Of course not, but elected officials (even phoney ones) must defend their power. Btw, this is why assassinations are popular.
Why would you ever willingly give power over yourself to another person? This question has nothing to do with vigilantism, I don't support that. Just asking.
I take it you really like making assumptions and fallacious arguments , get back to me when you understand any of these words