Is it ever justifiable for the individual to take justice into his own hands?
Printable View
Is it ever justifiable for the individual to take justice into his own hands?
in my opinion yes, but only as a last resort.
for instance if say someone attempted to **** someone you love, got arrested went to court and got off with no sentence whats so ever, even though he has attempted to **** this person 3 times before(and gone to court each time)
Then yes, i do feel its justifiable in extreme circumstances.
On a day to day basis, no. In certain scenarios, where what your doing is justified, then yes. But then "justified" is subjective, so, I dunno.
No, never. It's stupid.
If someone kills your loved one and you go kill them, I understand that, but it's not justifiable. Vigilantism is never excusable, but it can be understandable.
We have laws and law enforcement for a reason. They're not perfect, but if everyone went around doing whatever they wanted, the world would be anarchic and a much worse place to live.
Well said. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
Of course it is
Just because society has us believing that the only people with authority are cops dose not mean we should just stand idly by when the police aren't around.
Would that technically still be vigilantism if it's within the law?
If it's within the law, obviously it's not wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by olaph
So in that regard, your own brand of justice could indeed be considered "ok"Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
But how many people would think instead of going on some vengeful spree of crime :P
and while technically what i was saying isn't Vigilantism i figure its something worth thinking/talking about.
Then it's not your own brand of justice.Quote:
Originally Posted by olaph
It's theirs, still.
Yes, I have. Great movie. And yes, part of the reason why I started this topic. I was very upset with the ending, which I won't spoil. Personally I sometimes really do want retribution, and though I'm not completely against it, I never act upon it because it's a slippery slope into chaos.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSkald
I kind of disagree, there are stupid laws which are wrong, in my opinion (Especially the old ones which aren't followed anymore but are still technically laws) and there are things that are illegal which I don't think are wrong. You could still be within these laws and not be wrong, but the breaking of them I wouldn't consider wrong either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
I do agree that vigilantism is not a good idea though. The problem I see with vigilantism is that it would often (from what I picture) focus on revenge instead of rehabilitation. Society's laws are meant to protect people and rehabilitate (or discourage them from doing them again) those who have broken the laws (or imprision permanently / kill if the crime was serious enough, which isn't acceptable by everyone).
Only if you can pull it off like Batman.
LOL. How does being able to pull it off make it any more justifiable, in your opinion?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJESTERJ
Keep in mind I'm playing Devil's Advocate here.
It doesn't make it justifiable. It just makes people think it is. I mean is anyone here willing to tell Batman to stop?
It'll never be justifiable, but it can sure be made easier to do.
To protect one's self or loved ones then yes, but otherwise no.
There are bad people in this world....but murder is still murder.
Lots of bad things happen.....let the people who get paid to stop these bad things do their jobs.
Batman isn't real! He is a liar.
Someone kills another by accident.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oisterboy
How do you get around that? How do you get around all the millions of variations?
Manslaughter, hmm? Do you "accidentally" get to kill the person who accidentally killed your loved one?
Nobody can suggest that an eye-for-an-eye works. It's not justice, it's vengeance. That's no way to run a society.
If your knocking them out and dragging them to the police station with some evidence attached spider-manz stylez, then yes.
If you kill someone accidentally in defense of a loved one, then yes.
If it's just killing when it's not an accident and you want your personal idea of "Justice" to be fufilled, then no. That's not justifiable.
It really depends on the circumstances.
like batman?
yes.
To those who referenced Spider-Man and Batman, that's precisely what one of the underlying themes of Watchmen was; the inherent ridiculousness and absurdity of costumed vigilantes.
If someone was going around in the Batsuit, beating people up at night, I'd want him off the streets as soon as possible. In theory, it's great; someone to scare criminals into not being criminals, but all it takes is one nutjob without fear, like the Joker, to result in craptons more crime than one man can ever stop.
Batman references are the best. Hypothetical references are the best.
If you where ***** wrongfully and you decide to cut the perpetrators junk off....then sure I'd look away if I was in the jury.
Now if you went on a crazy "Junk chopping" spree, and took it into your hands to dismember rapists.....I would probably write a movie about it and make millions.
That's just sick. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Croix
Our so called Law is merely opinion forced into our minds since we were children. Law is nothing more than a tool used by the ones in power to allow themselves to stay in power. Think of law as something that keeps everyone in their own classes.
In my opinion, Capital Punishment should be legal once more and used widely. We get these people that go to jail for a short period of time, then they get released only to do the same thing over and over. I personally think the law should be changed so that the Death Penalty should be given to whomever commits a crime that warrants it. Take a look at all these useless prisons, they waste time and resources. Should just take all the prisoners and execute them all now to make the world a better place.
Deterrence of crime is what is needed in our society, not punishments. So for me, Vigilantism is a yes, if the "law" won't bring proper Judgment to crime, then let the citizens do it.
No offense, but you just said an 18 year old man deserves to be put to death for use of a natural herb. ANYONE that has broken the law, to you, must be killed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Judgment
I really see no credibility in anything you've said since. You are a dangerous thinker, or non-thinker as it may be.
wait isnt that the punishment then, not the law? or is the law the punishment?Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
I would use the word proven with extreme caution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Judgment
Especially with trying to argue the timelessness of an ethical "fashion" that has outlived itself that clearly. (I can't remember any past development to come close in being so strikingly amiss; Even when I look at the stormy history of the ethics of the catholic church, I nothing comparable comes to my mind.)
[Edit: I purposefully avoided going into the aspect of Positivist ethics in the Third Reich as a huge enabling of what we now call it's crimes against humanity. I don't think that we need to dive into termini, to understand what these are. If you want to see the result of your ideas and experience them face to face; Go online and dig up some photo archive from any of the popular sites of their "detention, or else system" and watch it for about 30 minutes. Then tell us how you felt about that.]
The punishment is what awaits if you break the law, in most cases. This is a deterrent.Quote:
Originally Posted by V-Opolis
However, even if someone feels they may get away with a crime, the very fact that it's illegal can deter them.
may get away? then ya? 100% sure they will get away? not in the slightest, unless they have morals of steel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
So we agree that on its own, the law can be a factor?Quote:
Originally Posted by V-Opolis
Splendid.
cool, its a good day. i agreed with you, i swam half a mile(first exercise in 3 months), worked 8 hours. all thats left is a 12 hour nap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
Do what must be done! Show no mercy on them!! >:(
What the Third Reich did against the Jewish people was a crime and I never said otherwise. There was no justice, just atrocities in the Endlosung. What I'm refering to is their method of rule. What I'm trying to say is that to limit crime, fear and terror is necessary.Quote:
[Edit: I purposefully avoided going into the aspect of Positivist ethics in the Third Reich as a huge enabling of what we now call it's crimes against humanity. I don't think that we need to dive into termini, to understand what these are. If you want to see the result of your ideas and experience them face to face; Go online and dig up some photo archive from any of the popular sites of their "detention, or else system" and watch it for about 30 minutes. Then tell us how you felt about that.]
Of course, crime would never entirely go away since crime is in itself a necessity to society and will always exist. Even in a world free of "crime", the definition of crime would change with society and new meanings of crime would appear.
I've pretty much seen all the photo's and videos related to the Nazi Concentration camps and while I agree that certain parts may be too much, I don't think it was all that wrong as a core idea. This whole idea of using criminals to advance humanity, I personally think it's a good idea. If criminals were used for human testing, we could advance science at a much faster pace. Sacrifice criminals to save the innocent. The way they went about it, making use of the hair and skin of the victims for everyday products can be viewed as productive in an economic sense. Disturbing but productive.
Thanks...I'm happy you signed up just to say this to me. I actually take being called insane a compliment. My favorite characters in video games, comics, novels, etc. happen to be the "insane" evil mastermind who plots to totally destroy the world due to the guilt and corruption of humanity.Quote:
Wow. Judgement is one of the most insane people I've actually met on a forum. I'm not playing around or trying to bring you down, but you should seek professional help, ASAP.
Fascism isn't all that bad actually if you look at the original version of it. Just like with Communism (warped by Stalin), the original fascism and its ideals were totally warped by Mussolini and Hitler into the form society views it today (same with Communism).
You've got a point here but such a law would never pass in the first place. The laws we have today are meant to be followed to make society a safer and better place, thus they require to be followed. Laws such as speeding and marijuana are illegal but are rarely actually enforced. Currently, they don't pose too much of a threat but in time, more and more laws will be broken with low enforcement. What needs to be done is that the Justice System enforce its own laws.Quote:
Just because its a law doesn't mean its justified.If they made a law sayin you could only eat one meal a day consisting of under 600 calories, and nothing else, would you follow it?
ill leave you with this. No matter the consequences, will you ever be able to stop cheating on a test 100%?Quote:
Originally Posted by Judgment
Guy kills your son, threatens to kill your wife. You know who he is, and can kill him-but cannot give proof to police.
Kill him or let him kill your wife ?
Protect the one I love? Or don't?Quote:
Originally Posted by EpicPhail
I'd kill him. I may be hauled off to jail, but I know what I did was the better thing to do. What if I was the next one to die? What then?