Author Topic: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?  (Read 3855 times)

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #100 on: November 07, 2021, 12:58:38 AM »
Is the jury rigged if it is more likely to find someone guilty or is it rigged if it's more likely to find someone innocent?

From all the stories I see from the leftist media, it's a zero sum game and only one of those options is available.

Race permeates everything. So does gender. That's what we're told. So are we looking for a jury of peers for the accused or for the victim? Well, obviously when the accused is white and the victim is black we need a jury that represents the victim. When it's the other way around the jury must look more like the accused.

In the Arbery case we see a big deal about not enough black people being on the jury. There are 12 people and 1 is black. That's about 8.3 percent. Blacks are about 14% of the population nationally, apparently. If there were 2 blacks on the jury then that's about 16.7 percent, and if 1 is not enough then we need at least 2 to have a fair trial but isn't that over-representation then? No, because the county is 27% black.

https://www.npr.org/2021/11/05/1052435205/ahmaud-arbery-jury

"A Duke University-led study of a decade of criminal convictions in Florida, for example, found that all-white jury pools convicted Black defendants 16% more often than white defendants. But when even just one Black person was added to the jury pool, the gap in conviction rates nearly disappeared.

Angie Setzer, a senior attorney for the Equal Justice Initiative, told NPR that diverse juries are more likely to discuss ideas that an all-white jury might overlook, such as racial profiling.

"Studies have shown that racially representative juries engage in a more thoughtful and deliberative fact-finding process," Setzer said. "Studies have shown that racially representative juries are also better able to assess the reliability and credibility of witness testimony."

The jury in the recent criminal case against Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer who killed George Floyd, was even more racially diverse than the county where the trial took place. Chauvin was convicted and sentenced to 22 1/2 years in prison."

------------------------------------

Wow. So we basically get an outright admission that juries are racist. Well if they are racist should that benefit or hurt the defendant?

The story tells you. If the defendant is white the jury should be picked that will be more likely to convict and if the defendant is black the jury should be picked that is more likely to acquit. If that's justice in America, then the system is broken.

It seems like it's a brag that Chauvin was convicted by a jury more diverse than the trial county and the implication is that played a role in his conviction. So objectively, is he guilty or not guilty? No way to know. It all depends on the jury and that greatly depends on their race. If it had been an all white jury would he still have been convicted? The left says it's less likely and then they turn around and say it's good that he was convicted based on race, both his race as well as that of the jurors. When we're being told that an all white jury would have been less likely to convict a guy with the exact same evidence, something just isn't adding up. Same thing for the Arbery case.

Same thing for Zimmerman. What if he'd had an all black jury? And why shouldn't he? They're all still his peers right? Why couldn't all of the qualified black people in the jury pool serve on the jury? And what if they had convicted him based on the same evidence the jury he had saw? Would that have been justice? The left seems to think so.

When the left admits that race makes a difference, not only admits it but insists on it, they don't seem to stop to think about all of the ramifications.

One implication is that if having a jury of all one race is grossly unjust then how is it not at least somewhat unjust to have some of the jurors be a different race? Is a somewhat unjust decision okay then?


cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #101 on: November 07, 2021, 01:05:18 AM »
This was interesting too.

"A Duke University-led study of a decade of criminal convictions in Florida, for example, found that all-white jury pools convicted Black defendants 16% more often than white defendants. But when even just one Black person was added to the jury pool, the gap in conviction rates nearly disappeared."

Why?

Was the defendant actually innocent or was it a form of jury nullification, maybe even subconscious?

The implication of that factoid is that justice was done because the defendant was not convicted, but if the defendant actually did the crime and the evidence proved it, if they were not convicted then is that really justice?

You gotta love how the media spins these things one way but their own facts don't always go in the direction they like to assume.

Of course the same type of thing would be in play for white juries with white victims too. Hardly likely that it would only work for one group.

jc44

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #102 on: November 07, 2021, 07:24:22 AM »
This was interesting too.

"A Duke University-led study of a decade of criminal convictions in Florida, for example, found that all-white jury pools convicted Black defendants 16% more often than white defendants. But when even just one Black person was added to the jury pool, the gap in conviction rates nearly disappeared."

Why?

Was the defendant actually innocent or was it a form of jury nullification, maybe even subconscious?

The implication of that factoid is that justice was done because the defendant was not convicted, but if the defendant actually did the crime and the evidence proved it, if they were not convicted then is that really justice?

You gotta love how the media spins these things one way but their own facts don't always go in the direction they like to assume.

Of course the same type of thing would be in play for white juries with white victims too. Hardly likely that it would only work for one group.
If you want my guess, I'd go with the presence of a Black person on the jury made the other members of the jury less likely to express racist views in their deliberations and the lack of such stereotyping meant more weight was given to the facts and arguments presented in court.  That seems to fit with my observations of human nature.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #103 on: November 10, 2021, 07:57:34 PM »
Did anyone pick up on the trial coverage today that Kyle Rittenhouse had family in the city, who were no longer being protected by the Powers That Be? Who is wrong? He who stays away or he who goes to protect his family?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #104 on: November 12, 2021, 12:40:18 PM »
Oh he was in a residential area protecting his family then? What a crock. You know what? You don't shoot somebody dead for breaking a window of an unoccupied building. You let the window get broken.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #105 on: November 12, 2021, 02:09:06 PM »
You don't shoot somebody dead for breaking a window of an unoccupied building. You let the window get broken.

Do you really believe anything like that is that what happened?

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #106 on: November 12, 2021, 03:14:41 PM »
It seems more like Rittenhouse was attacked for the crime of trying to put out a fire in a dumpster.

So it's less like shooting someone for breaking windows and more like a guy fixing windows getting attacked by the people who broke them or supported them getting broken and then the guy has to defend himself.

Kind of like how people get shot while cleaning up graffiti. That graffiti and those fires don't get there by magic. Someone has to make that happen and it takes time and effort which they naturally don't like to see wasted.


https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-graffiti-20161201-story.html

"Authorities say a city employee was fatally shot while painting over graffiti in San Francisco’s Potrero Hill neighborhood."

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #107 on: November 12, 2021, 03:22:56 PM »
You don't shoot somebody dead for breaking a window of an unoccupied building. You let the window get broken.

Do you really believe anything like that is that what happened?

He had his firearm and was supposedly protecting an empty building and unattended cars. How exactly was he going to stop somebody from rioting and throwing as brick through the car window? He might have thought his mere presence was enough to deter them. But assuming they weren't scared off, his next move is to shoot them dead.

Greg Davidson

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #108 on: November 12, 2021, 08:16:28 PM »
I just don't get the logic of the stand-your-ground/Rittenhouse advocates. If you get to kill people if they scare you enough, would it be okay for someone to have killed Rittenhouse? Could someone have claimed they had a role to protect peaceful protesters, shown up at the march, and shot Rittenhouse as a threat? What is the principle that makes some of these killings okay and some of them not okay?

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #109 on: November 13, 2021, 06:06:08 AM »
Greg, He should have just let them take his gun and kill him?

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #110 on: November 13, 2021, 08:31:00 AM »
"He should have just let them take his gun and kill him?"

I think the point is he should have just let the riot happen, stood back and watched the city burn like the police were doing. If the government chooses not to do anything about it and the government is an extension of the will of the people then it was the will of the people for those riots and arsons and destructive acts of vandalism to happen. It's not his place or the place of any citizen to oppose the will of the people and the obvious intent of the government to pull back to give protestors "space to destroy". In fact, it's tantamount not just to vigilantism but to treason. Putting out a righteously started dumpster fire, repairing a wokely broken window, and cleaning up inspirational graffiti should be a crime but since technically it's not we need to come down as hard as possible on the people who do it, people like this here Rittenhouse. He's the one who started the trouble. If he hadn't been out there with a fire extinguisher putting out fires and trying to stop people from vandalizing a lot of used cars, if people had just cowered in their root cellars in the long proud history of true patriotic Americans who just let anyone and everyone walk all over them and never put up a fight, if he had done that then there wouldn't have been any problems. No problems at all.

Sure a lot of fires would have been set, businesses razed, cars destroyed, windows broken, and so on but that's not the problem. Racism is the problem and all that type of stuff is the solution.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #111 on: November 13, 2021, 10:59:57 AM »
If you get to kill people if they scare you enough, would it be okay for someone to have killed Rittenhouse?

Replace "they scare you" with "you think they're literally about to kill you" and yes, 100%. It's can be a difficult thing to prove, but it's not difficult to understand.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #112 on: November 13, 2021, 03:24:27 PM »
Maybe we should handle protests like China instead, just mow everyone down. That would establish some real law and order. Graffiti in Tianamen square? Execute!

Instead of letting people run wild, or killing them, we could fix the damn problems that have so inflamed the country. But no, instead we do nothing to stop lethal escalations involving people who have committed minor crime, instead of making every excuse possible.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #113 on: November 14, 2021, 08:34:27 AM »
https://news.yahoo.com/police-showed-defendants-video-ahmaud-161003826.html

So more information is coming out. Whatever happened, what we know for sure is that it wasn't a case of two racist white men seeing a black man out for a jog and just up and deciding to murder after falsely assuming he must be a criminal just because he is black and jogging in their neighborhood as the media makes it out. He was the specific guy the police had circulated pictures to be on the lookout for.


"Larry English, the property owner, previously testified he wanted police to identify the man in the videos and tell him he was trespassing and not to enter the property again.

Arbery was recorded again walking around the unfenced construction site on Nov. 18, 2019, though once again nothing was taken that day, according to English. Rash told the jury he would show screenshots of the videos to people as he made his rounds but no one was ever able to identify him."

So basically after hiding the fact that Arbery had trespassed in the house before, now it's coming out. And we now have the police going around asking people to look out for Arbery based on the surveillance photos they have of him trespassing.

It seems like it's not unreasonable to be able to ask a trespasser what they're doing and to stop doing it please. The No Trespassing signs mean that under the law you don't need to tell them not to trespass for it to be trespassing, and on all the properties of houses that are under construction that people talk about going into and I've gone into myself in new construction areas, there aren't No Trespassing signs on those and if there are nobody in their right mind would go into one as people kept doing with this property.

So why the guns? Hey you never know. People are getting shot and killed all the time, by kids younger than Arbery, for less reason that this, like that Nike big-wig who as a teen shot an innocent young black man for no good reason at all, got a slap on the wrist in juvie, and then went on to become a big shot. People get shot and killed for cleaning up graffiti, for asking someone to turn down their car stereo in an apartment complex, and supposedly a man was shot once just for snoring. I still do agree that the guns drawn are problematic so a trial is reasonable but there's more information coming out than what we've been led to believe all this time. But that always happens with this media and their rabble rousing race baiting stories now doesn't it?

For instance, they knew when they saw him that he wasn't just out jogging. He looked like he was running away from a crime scene and he was being pursued because that's exactly what was happening. Pictures of Arbery had been put out by the cops to the locals and one of them recognized him in that very house again. Now the guy pursuing him was doing what everyone says should be done, just follow him at a distance until the police show up. To these guys though they don't know that's what he's doing and it looks to them more like a criminal is fleeing the scene of a crime and someone is after him.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #114 on: November 14, 2021, 10:41:24 AM »
The defendant who brought the gun said he showed it to Aubrey to de-escalate the situation and that he shot him because he was afraid Aubrey would take his gun and shoot him with his own gun.  Those two statements do not make sense to me.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #115 on: November 14, 2021, 12:52:28 PM »
Isn't it curious that with all the other people that had trespassed on film, this is the only surveillance photo passed around? I am accepting that everything they claimed in the article is uncontested, though there's no mention of cross examination.

Quote
The men say they thought Arbery might have been the same man caught on camera in the half-built house when he ran past the McMichaels' driveway in Satilla Shores, a leafy, mostly white residential community outside Brunswick, on Feb. 23, 2020.

That sounds like a solid identification to you? It sounds to me like they don't get many black men in the neighborhood and they made an assumption and chased him down with guns.

Never know what could happen? That's ultimate paranoia right there. Another way to not get shot by people in the street is to leave them the hell alone for a trivial misdemeanor.

It was only their pride that made it important to confront someone who wandered into a property and left without taking anything.

Note that there were other people entering that property that didn't get hunted down or asked not to come back. They used the words "we don't know him". I have to wonder if that's just code for "he was black in this white neighborhood, so we gave the whites a pass.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #116 on: November 14, 2021, 05:59:48 PM »
"They used the words "we don't know him". I have to wonder if that's just code for "he was black in this white neighborhood, so we gave the whites a pass."

Maybe. Maybe it just means that they knew the other people and didn't know him. So they could just go to the other people and say hey can you read? Do you understand what No Trespassing means? Stay off my property! Just like they wanted to do with Arbery. Or maybe they knew those people so didn't care but if it's a stranger that's a different story. I'm not sure how much it makes a difference in the case but it would be interesting to find out. Of course if it doesn't assist the narrative it would never be reported.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #117 on: November 14, 2021, 06:59:48 PM »
How do you imagine it would go if he was sufficiently cowed by their show of force? Assuming it was even him, which they didn't know with any certainty by their own admission.

Hey, have you been trespassing?

No I sure haven't.

Okay, have a nice day.

kidv

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #118 on: November 17, 2021, 06:22:34 PM »
"A black jogger..."

https://amgreatness.com/2020/05/12/lying-media-cant-be-trusted-on-ahmaud-arbery-story/

"Finally, while Arbery is indeed running on the video, was he actually just a jogger out in the neighborhood? He was wearing what appear to be long jean shorts and high-top basketball shoes—not exactly jogging attire."

Vigilante justice often gets it wrong. The same thing applies to the vigilante media we have right now, out to lynch white people and ready, willing, and able to lie to do it.

I like this story that purports to dissect the lies and tells us what one of the lies is but fails to tell the truth.

"Far-right conservatives have claimed that the 25-year-old was wearing Timberland boots and khaki shorts when he was shot and killed by Gregory and Travis McMichael."

Okay, so he wasn't wearing Timberland boots and khaki shorts. Good to know. But the story doesn't tell what he WAS wearing because that wouldn't help their case either. The vigilante media takes justice into their own hands.

This was an example of false news that really irritates me now (Ahmaud Arbery's shoes), because it's something demonstrably false, that was known or could be demonstrated immediately at the time, but is a completely false statement that got run up the flagpole right after this story came out and it seems evil and pernicious.  ("Arbery's not a runner; he's wearing Timberland boots.") To this day I had not seen somebody publish a picture of Arbery's running shoes, which would have completely deflated that b.s.  In the last couple weeks I've been hearing that the arrest report catalogued that Arbery was wearing running shoes, but I haven't seen that trumpeted around.

Today I did a search, and it's acknowledged: The guys' defense attorney states that they are "Nike Max-Air" shoes in court https://therecount.com/watch/arbery-killing-trial-day-8/2645875498 and he doesn't want the shoes admitted because of jogging issues or something. 

Nike's sure aren't Timberland's, and it infuriates me that somebody felt like they had to inject a false claim of this guy running in work boots, so he's not really a jogger. . .

I know it's been lingering in my critical mind for a year, that I think there was an unanswered question of whether the guy was wearing work boots or Nike's, and the answer was always Nike's.

And that's the shape of our discourse today.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #119 on: November 17, 2021, 11:34:24 PM »
Here's a pretty good rundown from NPR of all places.

https://www.npr.org/2021/11/05/1052065912/ahmaud-arbery-mcmichael-bryan-murder-trial-opening-arguments

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/judge-asked-evidence-ahmaud-arberys-past-troubles-77638053

So he was wearing shoes that could be used for running. Some reports lied about him not. But he wasn't just jogging through the neighborhood either. Maybe he was doing sprints as he passed their house when they saw him? Maybe. He'd just come from trespassing in that house under construction, just saw himself spotted by a neighbor, was on probation so even a charge of trespassing could put him in trouble, is a diagnosed schitzoprhenic, illegally carried a gun onto school grounds, pleaded guilty as a thief for trying to steal a TV from Walmart, was known as a thief by "a local convenience store manager, Crystal Wilson, (who) told the judge about a young Black man who several times stole food. Wilson said she recognized it was Arbery after seeing his photo in the newspaper after his death." Should we mention the marijuana use? No, no need for that with everything else. The guy was no innocent guy just out for a jog. He was guilty of trespassing if nothing else. Just a misdemeanor? Sure, but when you're already on probation it's not "just a misdemeanor" anymore, is it?

If the jury isn't allowed to hear the whole truth then whatever, but is it the same for most of the press who are convicting these guys in the court of public opinion? The public doesn't get to know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth either?

kidv

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #120 on: November 18, 2021, 12:58:06 AM »
https://www.runnersworld.com/runners-stories/a32883923/ahmaud-arbery-death-running-and-racism/

Cherry, this piece won the pulitzer prize last year.  Give it a shot.

I run. I have run. I ran in basketball shoes until I was 22.  I walk into under construction homes and peer around.  I've run at night with nothing in my pockets and realized that I'm safe.

I read that article about Ahmaud Arbery liking to run a few months ago, and the whole time there was something tickling at the back of brain wondering if he was really "running" in Timberlands, and if the article was covering that up, adopting him as a runner.  That piece of disinformation made me side-eye the story a bit, and I'm happy to be clear now that Arbery was wearing "grey [Nike] athletic shoes" (per the autopsy report) http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/arbery,%20ahmaud_report.pdfhttp://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/arbery,%20ahmaud_report.pdf, but I'm upset that someone felt a need to make up that Arbery was wearing Timberlands.  I look in that article now and it gives a clear, exact description of Ahmaud's shoes low-top Nikes, but I remember wondering at the time if that detail was fudged or made-up, because who would invent that he was wearing Timberlands?  I had not seen any official statement on the shoes, so I left my mind open.

Knowing that Arbery was wearing Nikes, I wholeheartedly identify with and agree with the Runner's World story.

Ahmaud Arbery didn't have anything in his pockets, he didn't have a phone or keys on him, he was wearing running clothes, and he was out running.  He was 2.5 miles from his house, so he had to have run that far to get to Satilla Shores.

Then Arbery got run to ground by three men with guns in two different trucks, blocking him, hitting him, and yelling that they would "blow his f***ing head off" if he didn't stop.

Pretty wild.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #121 on: November 18, 2021, 03:24:54 AM »
Okay, let's grant that he was out running. The point is these guys say when he ran past his house it looked not like he was a guy just out running but a guy who was running away from just getting caught trespassing when he saw someone watching him go through the house.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/police-defendant-changed-story-suspected-arbery-81061380

"Greg McMichael said the chase began when he saw Arbery “hauling ass” past his home on a Sunday afternoon. Saying he recognized Arbery from security camera videos shown to him by a neighbor who wasn't charged in the case, he ran inside and grabbed a .357 magnum handgun...

... Prosecutors say the men had no legal reason to pursue Arbery with guns, as there's no evidence Arbery committed any crimes in the Satilla Shores subdivision outside the port city of Brunswick. Proseuctor Linda Dunikoski showed the jury security camera video from inside the house under construction recorded just before the deadly chase. Arbery can be seen wandering through the open-framed interior but doesn't seem to touch anything. He ran after a neighbor outside called police."

I like how the prosecutor outright lies here saying there's no evidence Arbery committed any crimes when he's caught trespassing.

Okay, I understand how everyone says that's not really a crime, like throwing your cigarette butt on the ground right outside my front door instead of on your own property or in the trash isn't a crime, or like playing your music so loud in your car driving through an apartment complex that the bass wakes up babies and starts them crying while rattling the fillings out of the teeth of people eating their dinner, or tagging local businesses with graffiti that they have to keep cleaning up. But guess what? Actually, those are crimes, and if someone suspects you of doing that, as these guys correctly suspected Arbery of trespassing, they've got every right as an American to come up to you and ask you what you're doing and then after confirming that you're doing what they thought you were doing and you don't have a legal reason to be doing it they've got every right to tell you to stop.

So that's what these guys tried to do at first. Making that part out to be a crime or racist on their part doesn't make sense.

Of course what happened after that when Arbery also exercised his right to ignore them and kept running which he had a right to do, that's up to the jury to decide.


cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #122 on: November 18, 2021, 03:55:54 AM »
And in some cases of trespassing it's not even trespassing until you tell the person to stop. That's literally what these guys were saying. Stop.

If someone rings your doorbell once a day because they want to talk to you and you ignore them hoping they'll stop but they don't, you can't say they're trespassing until you talk to them and say stop that and don't come onto my property anymore.

It's different in different places but that's how it can be. Usually when you put up No Trespassing signs that makes it trespassing without you having to say anything else. Apparently that wasn't enough here because he kept trespassing even with the signs up.

And for everyone saying they are always traipsing through houses under construction, that's one thing if those houses are still for sale and there aren't any No Trespassing signs around and it probably shouldn't be at night either. You're on pretty solid ground as a potential buyer or a looky-lou until someone tells you otherwise. But if the houses are already owned and / or there are No Trespassing signs up and you still go in there, which I highly doubt anyone talking about what how they often do what Arbery did is really talking about, then you know you're wrong, you know you're breaking the law too, and you shouldn't complain if somebody yells at you to stay off the property or if the police get called on you.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #123 on: November 18, 2021, 08:42:47 AM »
Sorry, I didn't read any of these stories you linked, just read your comments.

I run too.  Or at least I used to alot.  At about 2.5 miles I'd probably be ready for a rest unless I was in the shape I was back in the 90s, 00s.  I'd probably stop at a construction site instead of somebody's front lawn, especially if I was black in a white neighborhood.  If I was 22 I'd probably walk around the construction site for curiousity.  I did it all the time when I was early teen.  It's fun.  It's neat to walk through a construction site.  I grant it's not a good idea, but hey. 

You're welcome to your suspicion if there are plenty of burglaries going on.  You're welcome to tail a dude you're suspicious of.  You're welcome to bring your gun in your truck. 

What is not smart is attempting to stop the individual yourself.  Anybody with common sense should be able to tell you that's dangerous.  What's even more dangerous is bringing your gun down with you when you get out.  Even more dangerous is attempting an apprehension if you are not a law enforcement officer that has identified himself. 

So given that I am a big believer in self defense, and this guy is out running, two guys get out of a truck with guns and threaten me, personally, if Aubrey were armed and decided to shoot these two guys who jumped out of a truck with weapons and attempted to stop him and were not law enforcement, then I would have supported him blowing holes in these two guys.  That's the right to self defense.  These cats were not law enforcement.  I've been in their situation.  You observe and report.  Don't put yourself at risk or anyone else at risk. 

These cats are probably being sent away and that's right.  They shot an innocent man as far as I know, because they were being cowboys.  The runner had every right to defend himself or try and escape given that these people were not identified as any sort of valid law enforcement.  *censored*, even if this guy WAS a burglar, he's not under any legal obligation to surrender to Batman and Robin. 


TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #124 on: November 18, 2021, 11:42:29 AM »
If it isn't racially motivated, maybe you can tell me why none of the white trespassers got chased down for a talking to. I really don't care if he had put a brick through a window and stole a cell phone, it's not worth ending someone's life.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #125 on: November 18, 2021, 02:14:36 PM »
The media is making it out like they just saw a young black man jogging passed their house so they ran him down and murdered him because they are racists. I'm saying there was more to it than that.

They were starting to keep a more careful eye on the place. Do we know if they actually watched white people walk in and out and didn't care? Sure they have it on the surveillance video but that doesn't mean they saw it when it was happening. Those people probably drove there or were just walking by and lived in the neighborhood. If they did see them and they said stop I want to talk to you what would have happened? They probably would have just talked and nobody would have gotten shot, like normal people. Hey what were you doing it that house? Just looking. Well, don't. Okay, sorry, won't happen again. Same thing could have happened with Arbery but didn't. They didn't show their guns until he ignored them. If he would have just stopped and said yeah sorry about that I was just curious or whatever that might have been the end of it. Or maybe the police come over and talk to him and whatever happens happens. Now there are cases where black people are just attacked for being black but this wasn't that. He actually did trespass and had done it multiple times before.

It doesn't really matter though. They are white and he's black. Must be racist. They need to go to prison in any case so cities don't burn. Can't let facts get in the way of that.

And maybe they do deserve to go to prison for what happened after they tried to talk to him and he refused. Could have let the cops handle it at that point. Should have. But the idea that people just need to let crime happen in their communities and take it because otherwise someone might get hurt isn't right either.

Stealing catalytic converters was just a misdemeanor until recently in Texas. Does that mean if you see someone stealing your catalytic converter it should be illegal for you to say hey what are you doing? If you're stealing my catalytic converter the way it looks like then I'd like you to stop. Yeah, it's dangerous. You could get shot. People have been shot over it and they've been shot at over it too. So what, just let people do it then and only the cops can confront them? Well the truth is the cops hardly do diddly about it unless they can catch them in the act and the crime happens so fast and the people use lookouts so that's hard to do.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #126 on: November 18, 2021, 02:31:35 PM »
Your making it out that it is unreasonable for black man to be afraid and or defend himself when white guys checking all the box's for being 'good old boy's  come after him.

Your setting a dangiours precedent if anyone thinking another person has committed a crime can kill them in a altercation and not be held accountable for it.

That the question of accountability changes due to the race of those involved speaks volumes   

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #127 on: November 18, 2021, 02:55:33 PM »
They probably would have just talked and nobody would have gotten shot, like normal people. Hey what were you doing it that house? Just looking. Well, don't. Okay, sorry, won't happen again. Same thing could have happened with Arbery but didn't. They didn't show their guns until he ignored them. If he would have just stopped and said yeah sorry about that I was just curious or whatever that might have been the end of it.

This is a stream of non pertinent information.  They didn't just try to talk to the guy.  That's fine.  They chased the guy down in a truck.  They didn't just try to talk to the guy.  They tried to block him in and detain him for questioning.  They had no legal authority to do that.  Arbery was under no legal obligation to do anything.  EVEN IF HE WAS A BURGLAR.  He could have been a serial killer with a chainsaw under his arm dripping blood.  They created a confrontation, while being armed, with no legal authority to do so. 

Quote
It doesn't really matter though. They are white and he's black. Must be racist. They need to go to prison in any case so cities don't burn. Can't let facts get in the way of that.

I get that there is a bunch of people screaming about racism here, and I agree that it is basically overblown and also non-pertinent.  But it also doesn't make these cowboys innocent. 

Quote
But the idea that people just need to let crime happen in their communities and take it because otherwise someone might get hurt isn't right either.

Nobody was letting crime happen in their communities.  They had a single burglary from what I've read.  Some dude called the police when they saw Arbery running down the road and they were there on the scene in like two minutes.  The proper response for communities to fight crime is to observe and report to the police.  Video.  Chasing some dude down the street, trying to run them over, trying to block them in, trying to detain them, are all illegal, and shouldn't be done, PRECISELY BECAUSE SOMEONE MIGHT GET HURT.  The suspected crime was burglary and trespassing.  If the cowboys had just stayed in their truck and waited for the police, one guy wouldn't be dead and two others wouldn't be going to prison, and that is PRECISELY WHY THEY SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY OBSERVED AND REPORTED.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist. 

Quote
Does that mean if you see someone stealing your catalytic converter it should be illegal for you to say hey what are you doing?

No.  But if I'm stealing your catalytic converters I'm not going to talk to you.  In fact, if you get close enough to talk to me and I'm stealing your catalytic converters and I'm armed, I might just pop you.  Which is why I don't have a problem with you being armed, but creating a confrontation with a possible criminal is stupid.  Now if I'm just jogging through a neighborhood and I'm black, I have to worry about shotgun toting rednecks in pickup trucks thinking I'm committing robberies and trying to run my ass over.  So I'm going to conceal carry.  And if you jump out of your pickup truck with a shotgun after trying to box me in or pull me over, I'll cap you and tell the police I was defending myself.  Never mind if I'm stealing catalytic converters.  I'll cap you and then steal your truck and bury your body in the swamp. 

Quote
So what, just let people do it then and only the cops can confront them? Well the truth is the cops hardly do diddly about it unless they can catch them in the act and the crime happens so fast and the people use lookouts so that's hard to do.

This helplessness thing is unbecoming and totally a red herring.  If you catch the individuals, video, observe, report.  If they shoot at you, shoot back.  If they run away, follow.  Do not create a confrontation.  And YES, call the police and let them attempt to detain and question and arrest, precisely because of all the ways things to go to *censored*.  That's not being helpless, that's being prudent.  Prudence is a virtue.  It's wisdom.  It's an attribute of great men and women.  People who lack it will be bit in the ass.  Jesus, I can google a hundred reports of police catching catalytic converter thieves. 

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #128 on: November 18, 2021, 03:04:16 PM »

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #129 on: November 18, 2021, 03:57:05 PM »
The shooter felt threatened by a silent person

https://www.yahoo.com/news/arberys-shooter-back-stand-black-060749054.html

That's not what the story says.  It states clearly that Robin felt threatened when Arbery either tried to hit him or take his shotgun. 

Arbery in turn most likely felt threatened when three unidentified men tried to box him in with pickup trucks and tried to stop him with a shotgun.  That's the thing with the right to reasonable self defense.  Everyone has it.  Two men had the legal right to defend themselves.  But only one side did anything illegal to create a confrontation and only one side instigated the threat by showing a shotgun.  That's why concealed carry is generally seen as the better option than open carry.  If you are open carrying and create a confrontation, you could reasonably be seen as threatening.  Particularly if you are trying to illegally detain someone. 

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #130 on: November 18, 2021, 04:42:22 PM »
Unless their is a hate crime charge the discussion of racism is moot in the eyes of the law. Or should be with regards to discussing the legal case.

With regard to the discussions about the event I'm definitely hearing racist overtones.  Explore the history of similar events where the color of skin of those involved are different and the arguments change.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #131 on: November 18, 2021, 05:31:15 PM »
Sometimes it just isn't worth it. This is why many police organizations now call off high speed pursuits. Because someone is liable to get killed over what may be drug possession or something equally mundane. Sure, that guy in the car might be a kidnapper and you just let him get away with it. But its still better on the average to back off.

Sometimes you just let someone attempt to pass a counterfeit bill rather than choking the life out of them.

Catalytic converters don't require vigilante tactics in order to keep our cars from looking like a prop in the road warriors. Thiefs get caught all the time.

arrest

Now if you think approaching these organized criminals is a good idea, you may want to pause and think that through.

Quote
The number of catalytic converter thefts has skyrocketed during the pandemic, driven by high unemployment, more cars sitting in driveways and a spike in the value of the metals used to make the devices, platinum, palladium and rhodium.

So you know how you could have prevented a lot of that? Universal Basic Income. As opposed to hunting people in the streets without a permit.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #132 on: November 18, 2021, 06:37:18 PM »
So you know how you could have prevented a lot of that? Universal Basic Income. As opposed to hunting people in the streets without a permit.

I don't think that's a good argument for UBI. 

1.  Tying the growth in theft to unemployment seems tenuous at best.  Unemployment is already way down from the peak last year and the number of CC thefts are still high.  The number 1 driver is the value of the metal making the crime payoff worthy of organization. 

2. The unemployed are already getting unemployment benefits.  They're already getting money from the gov. 

3.  After you get UBI, you're just going to give up CC theft?  I mean, do you want to live in a run down apartment on UBI when you can grab an extra $10 a month from 10 Toyota Tundras? 

4.  We have to pay people to not be criminals?  Isn't that a protection racket? 

5.  Jez you think inflation is bad when Uncle Joe just gives $1300 a year to people and pays early child care tax credit?  Wait till everybody gets $1000 extra a month.  In a couple of years, $1000 won't get you a pack of cigarettes and a six pack of Bud Light.  But catalytic converters will still be the ticket to all your dreams coming true. 


TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #133 on: November 18, 2021, 08:04:30 PM »
Unless their is a hate crime charge the discussion of racism is moot in the eyes of the law. Or should be with regards to discussing the legal case.

With regard to the discussions about the event I'm definitely hearing racist overtones.  Explore the history of similar events where the color of skin of those involved are different and the arguments change.

Well, you'll be happy to know that there are plenty of people who think the 3 white guys Rittenhouse shot were black. Or did think so, until they watched some trial coverage.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #134 on: November 18, 2021, 09:19:14 PM »
All good points Grant. The organized criminals aren't desperate. Im just saying that there are creative ways to solve problems. Like subsidizing electric vehicles. Nobody can steal my catalytic converter, the Chevy bolt doesn't have one.

As opposed to rounding up a posse of dunces who feel like big men to chase after and intimidate people.

Inflationary pressure would seem negligible if handled through offsetting revenue adjustment.

If all they wanted to do was warn him off, they could have just yelled out the window. They meant to physically intimidate him, and I suspect if his answers didn't have the right amount of respect and contrition he would have been pushed around.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #135 on: November 19, 2021, 02:49:40 AM »
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/man-who-raped-four-teenagers-gets-no-jail-time-judge-says-incarceration-isnt-appropriate

That's our "justice system" for you. Over three years for walking around the capitol in a hat with horns taking pictures while a serial rapist gets no jail time at all. A little bit of vigilantism might be moral in this case. Still illegal but probably moral.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #136 on: November 19, 2021, 08:03:34 AM »
That's our "justice system" for you. Over three years for walking around the capitol in a hat with horns taking pictures while a serial rapist gets no jail time at all. A little bit of vigilantism might be moral in this case. Still illegal but probably moral.

Go ahead Cherry.  You can get some Batman outfits pretty cheap around now since Halloween is over.  Since the max possible sentence in this case was 8 years imprisonment, I guess you'll be kidnapping the individual and holding him somewhere for 8 years? 

1.  The perp in question here committed the crimes when he was 16 and 17 years old.  That's not an excuse but a mitigation.  I don't know why he was tried as an adult and then let off with a suspended sentence, but I do know that typically more leeway is given to minors who have committed crimes.

2.  You can find thousands of examples every year of somebody's idea of justice not being done by our system.  It's never been perfect.  It will never be perfect.  It contains human beings as part of the process.  As flawed as it is, nobody seems to want a computer handing out sentences and metting justice.  If the system is imperfect and there are corrections to be made, the way to correct the system is through the political process, which is open.  Don't look for perfect justice on earth, and don't get wrapped up when the justice system is not exactly what you feel it should be.  Encouraging vigilantism and mob justice is not the way to have a functioning society.  But keep tugging on the threads saying it's loose and see what happens. 

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #137 on: November 19, 2021, 09:08:43 AM »
Sentences like that though encourage vigilantism. If you're the relatives of those girls and you see this what are you supposed to do with that? Or if you are the girls themselves?

There may be acts that approach the level of vigilantism which might not necessarily be illegal.

For instance, what if the victims or their relatives just doxxed him through his life? Could that be illegal intentional infliction of emotional distress and stalking or let's say if he started working somewhere they send a letter to corporate with his criminal record attached and their victim statement, and maybe they go into the office and point at him and tell everyone that this man raped me and then they walk out; would that be illegal? Maybe. It probably depends. Just sitting back and doing nothing though doesn't seem like a reasonable way to handle it either though.

I do my part though. That's why when I vote I always vote for the people who are toughest on crime. It makes sense though why a lot of people aren't complaining and don't seem to be very worried about it because otherwise it wouldn't make a lot of sense to keep voting for democrats.

fizz

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #138 on: November 19, 2021, 10:19:44 AM »
Quote
I always vote for the people who are toughest on crime
Yep. The best solution.
And because being toughest on crime is the best way to reduce it is the reason why the medieval times (or victorian London) where the safest crimeless societies ever.
And why Scandinavian countries, just as an example, are the worst hellish crime-pits of the world.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #139 on: November 19, 2021, 10:38:37 AM »
Quote
I always vote for the people who are toughest on crime
Yep. The best solution.
And because being toughest on crime is the best way to reduce it is the reason why the medieval times (or victorian London) where the safest crimeless societies ever.
And why Scandinavian countries, just as an example, are the worst hellish crime-pits of the world.

Your point is no doubt taken, but it's also apples to oranges. Being tough on crime is a local consideration IMO. So in a neighborhood or area with a crime problem, where the honest citizens feel they are not being defended properly, it might well be necessary to 'clean up' that area through tough policing and convictions. But when you refer to entire societies - and you could include the countries sitting behind the Iron Curtain, which were extremely tough on crime (in some respects) - then it's a different issue. Harsh policing is not a suitable way to base your entire society on. In other words a police state can create more harm than it intends to solve. And an unruly people are not suddenly going to be compliant and cooperative just because you do lots of hangings. But in a place like the U.S. where the people are not all that unruly, and are often very friendly and cooperative, then being tough on crime becomes a situational issue depending on the smaller locality. I tend to agree, though, that a blanket 'tough on crime' attitude is counterproductive when applied to areas where the populace is behaving honestly for the most part. No one benefits from crackdowns on pot possession and other such trivialities, other than the police captains who get their kickback.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #140 on: November 19, 2021, 10:41:08 AM »
Yep. The best solution.
And because being toughest on crime is the best way to reduce it is the reason why the medieval times (or victorian London) where the safest crimeless societies ever.
And why Scandinavian countries, just as an example, are the worst hellish crime-pits of the world.

I don't think this tracks across the spectrum.  Singapore is very tough on crime and has a low crime rate.  Same thing for Japan.  Same thing for Saudi Arabia. 

I don't think that there is much support in the United States for the idea that the primary purpose of criminal law and the criminal justice system is deterrence.  More people in the United States would support the idea that the justice system is about balance, protection, fairness, and rehabilitation. 

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #141 on: November 19, 2021, 11:08:28 AM »
I just read a good story about the Guardian Angels in New York City and how their brand of vigilantism took root across the world.

https://www.voanews.com/a/episode_nyc-guardian-angels-ramp-patrols-amid-spike-anti-asian-hate-4697541/6116831.html

Somebody should put a stop to these terrible vigilantes. Maybe we need to pass a law.

But they do answer the question asked, "How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?"

As broken as New York City was in the 80s. A the Guardian Angel brand of vigilantism is very moral, at least to a lot of people.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #142 on: November 19, 2021, 11:27:06 AM »
"More people in the United States would support the idea that the justice system is about balance, protection, fairness, and rehabilitation."

I guess that's my problem because for many crimes I don't believe in rehabilitation. So a child rapist murderer gets "rehabilitated" and set free. Best case, that person never commits anymore crimes and leads a good life. I'm actually not okay with that. After depriving innocent people of their lives, rehabilitation and freedom should not be an option.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-58408210

"Double child killer Colin Pitchfork has been released from prison, the Ministry of Justice has confirmed.

He was jailed in 1988 for raping and murdering 15-year-olds Lynda Mann and Dawn Ashworth in Leicestershire.

In June, the Parole Board concluded it was safe to release Pitchfork, who was the first murderer to be convicted using DNA evidence.

The MoJ said Pitchfork, 61, would remain under supervision for the rest of his life."

----------------------------------------

And there's plenty more like him. Like Arthur Shawcross who raped and murdered two children, served less than 15 years and then murdered 11 women after he was set free.

I say I don't believe in rehabilitation for some of these people but that's not necessarily accurate. If they can be rehabilitated, that's fine. But they should never be set free. They can be rehabilitated in prison where they are less likely to ever hurt innocent people again. If I could weigh the damage done by the innocent people hurt after so called rehabilitated people are set free with the good done by the rehabilitated people who never hurt anyone again, I'd say the damage done far outweighs the good done, like easily millions of times more damage than good, not in lives but pain.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #143 on: November 19, 2021, 11:46:16 AM »
I guess that's my problem because for many crimes I don't believe in rehabilitation. So a child rapist murderer gets "rehabilitated" and set free. Best case, that person never commits anymore crimes and leads a good life. I'm actually not okay with that. After depriving innocent people of their lives, rehabilitation and freedom should not be an option.

You're welcome to your opinion Cherry, and you can write letters to your Congresscritter or lobby for tougher sentencing on crime.  I am unsure if you are in the majority here.  Welcome to democracy.  You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need.  I don't really believe that Texas is soft on crime. 

Quote
"Double child killer Colin Pitchfork has been released from prison, the Ministry of Justice has confirmed.

Why should we get especially bent out of shape over things that happen in the UK?  There is plenty of injustice around the world that probably is higher up on the scale. 

Quote
And there's plenty more like him. Like Arthur Shawcross who raped and murdered two children, served less than 15 years and then murdered 11 women after he was set free.

A quick look at the case of Arthur Shawcross shows that he was given a light sentence only because it was part of a plea bargain for his confession, which was the only evidence the police had to convict him with.  This was exacerbated by an untrained staff at a psychiatric facility in the 80s who disregarded warnings from psychiatrists.  This is not really the fault of the justice system in New York.  It was a combination of a good serial killer with poor investigation abilities of the police.  Without the confession he could have gone completely free. 

These are kind of anecdotal examples.  They are not evidence of systematic problems with the justice system, though by the nature of the human elements in the justice system, there must be systematic problems with the justice system. 

I understand these kinds of things might inform your view of the justice system in the United States, and inform your view of vigilantism, but I can't see how it should inform mine.  You can find some entire groups of people that have been crapped on by the US Justice system much worse and I still don't believe that dressing up in sheets and burning crosses and lynch mobs are the answer. 

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #144 on: November 19, 2021, 01:15:13 PM »
cherry,

Quote
I guess that's my problem because for many crimes I don't believe in rehabilitation.

Some criminals and some crimes I actually agree that they can't be rehabilitated.  I think psychopaths (people with a oxytocin receptor mutation that makes them incapable of empathy) are genuinely incapable of rehabilitation.  Especially sadistic psychopaths.

They are not evidence of systematic problems with the justice system, though by the nature of the human elements in the justice system, there must be systematic problems with the justice system.

I think that the young man who is the son of extremely wealthy individuals getting just parole probably is evidence of a systemic problem in the US - the extremely wealthy and connected and their children tend to get absurdly light sentences even with slam dunk cases.  I think this needs systematic investigation of why this occurs.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #145 on: November 19, 2021, 01:19:41 PM »
I think psychopaths (people with a oxytocin receptor mutation that makes them incapable of empathy) are genuinely incapable of rehabilitation.

By "rehabilitation" do you mean incapable of being cured (which I would agree with), or incabable even of learning better coping skills, which includes learning why it's advantageous for them to comply with the law? I see no inherent reason why a psychopath needs to be a criminal, except to the extent that they see the system as advantaging them if they break the law. If that's the case it would seem to me like the goal would be to not make it an advantage to break the law - and the same goes for 'non-psychopaths' like boards of directors who would kill for money if they felt they could get away with it (like big tobacco). Or at least to convince the individual psychopath that there is at minimum equal or more advantage to staying within the law.

ETA - I once had to deal with a kid who, while perhaps not a psychopath per se (although it's possible he was one), exhibited all the signs of gaming everyone and doing anything he pleased he if knew the consequence wasn't as bad as the idea of doing whatever he wanted. What I did was simply explain to him I would make sure he gained more advantages if he played ball, rather than breaking rules. He saw the advantage in having me on his side and almost immediately stopped a lot of the bad stuff he was doing (although I still didn't trust him).
« Last Edit: November 19, 2021, 01:22:29 PM by Fenring »

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #146 on: November 19, 2021, 02:09:11 PM »
I'm pragmatic with respect to crime and punishment. If it costs you $1000 to replace a catalytic converter, but it would cost you $50K to hire a lawyer to defend you after you kill the thief, or cost you untold hours of lurking in the shadows with your shotgun, I got news for you. Just buy another converter and don't worry about it. Society won't crumble because some criminals are getting away with their crime for a while until it catches up to them. Al Swearengen isn't going to feed you to the pigs. Warlords aren't going to take your HOA board hostage.

Department stores understand this. They build theft into their budget rather than frisk every customer as they exit. They try to prevent the merchandise from leaving, but generally their security guards don't hop in a pickup truck to chase down the guy who stole $130 pair of jeans. Particularly if they were just acting suspiciously but didn't even take anything.

Righteous wrath is just a bad, unproductive idea.

Similar with sentencing. If we could build a device that irrevocably conditioned a person to be physically incapable of violence, a la Clockwork Orange, what would be the point of paying to incarcerate that person for the next 20 years?

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #147 on: November 19, 2021, 02:22:52 PM »
I think that the young man who is the son of extremely wealthy individuals getting just parole probably is evidence of a systemic problem in the US - the extremely wealthy and connected and their children tend to get absurdly light sentences even with slam dunk cases.  I think this needs systematic investigation of why this occurs.

I think a single data point is never evidence of a systemic problem, and I think you would agree with me.  I imagine you can find multiple data points that support the idea that the justice system in the US favors the extremely wealthy and connected, but that still wouldn't be evidence, just as much as multiple data points of immigrants engaged in criminal activity does not mean that immigrants as a whole are more inclined to criminal activity than non-immigrants.  Evidence for systemic problems must examine an entire system.  I see a whole bunch of journalists on the case, but I havn't seen something in a peer reviewed journal that would lead me to believe that the question has been systematically studied and researched. 

I honestly would not be surprised if the justice system favors the rich and connected.  The rich and connected can first afford better lawyers.  I completely support a law that would socialize the legal profession and make all lawyers employees of the government.  Where they are all getting paid $75K out of law school and making 7% raises annually dependent on a government accountant's performance review.  All law schools may become government run institutions.  Just don't expect the quality of your justice to improve overall.    I think the only other countries where all the lawyers are paid by the government are communist. 

I also imagine that the rich and powerful are able to present a better appearance in court and are generally more photogenic.  We can replace juries with computers, but just remember that the in the case of Apol v Rogers, the computer council unjustly sentenced William Rogers to death. 

I suppose the rich and powerful are also more able to bribe juries and judges, though evidence that this is a systemic problem is also lacking. 


Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #148 on: November 19, 2021, 02:33:55 PM »
Department stores understand this. They build theft into their budget rather than frisk every customer as they exit. They try to prevent the merchandise from leaving, but generally their security guards don't hop in a pickup truck to chase down the guy who stole $130 pair of jeans. Particularly if they were just acting suspiciously but didn't even take anything.

Depends on the environment.  Much depends on the concept that shoplifting is risky and that if you are caught you will be prosecuted and punished.  When this layer of deterrence is removed, in the spirit of fairness and saving money, you end up with what you have going on in San Francisco right now, where organized crime moves in to take advantage of a community weakness.  CVS ended up having to spend a bunch of money on efforts to get their razor blades back.  I suppose you can call this organized vigilantism in the face of a weak community, but CVS wasn't working with multiple federal and state agencies to lynch people or beat the pulp out of them and leave them on the front steps of the GCPD. 

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: How broken does a justice system have to be before vigilantism is moral?
« Reply #149 on: November 19, 2021, 02:48:38 PM »
There may be acts that approach the level of vigilantism which might not necessarily be illegal.

For instance, what if the victims or their relatives just doxxed him through his life? Could that be illegal intentional infliction of emotional distress and stalking or let's say if he started working somewhere they send a letter to corporate with his criminal record attached and their victim statement, and maybe they go into the office and point at him and tell everyone that this man raped me and then they walk out; would that be illegal? Maybe. It probably depends. Just sitting back and doing nothing though doesn't seem like a reasonable way to handle it either though.

You do realize that with a conviction for sexual assault(multiple counts), under Megan's Law, he will be required to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life? And that those sex offender registries are public information? He is going to be doxed for the rest of his life.