What do you think of Vigilantes?

22-12-2008 12:39am

Holsten wrote: »

He should have finished the job.

Agreed ,but the guy was really sound and quiet ,the last thing you would expect was he would be in court for something.

Fair play to him.

22-12-2008 12:40am

thetyreman wrote: »

AND?

Finished college before the case and the guy wasn't someone who bragged about things.

gurramok · 22-12-2008 12:41am

SteveC wrote: »

Ireland already has a self appointed vigilante group.

They are (were) on the news every day for punishment beatings and kneecappings.

Good luck to you trying to get them to swap the combats and balaclava's for rubber suits and capes.:rolleyes:

These?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9NSwOlrhoI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9NSwOlrhoI

Steve · 22-12-2008 12:51am

sharpshooterH wrote: »

I Really Am seeing your point though.

I like what you did there..:D

gurramok wrote: »

Scenario.

You live in a downtrodden area with serious anti-social disorder where your home and your kids are attacked on a daily basis. You name it, windows being bricked in, your car constantly damaged, you cannot sleep at night due to harassment, your kids being physically attacked on the street where fear is in their eyes.

You call the gards and after about 20 tries, they catch a couple of the perpetrators and the courts let them go constantly because they are too young.

You have options. Option 1 is to move out but you need someone to buy your house. Option 2 is a batch of vigilantes formed from a few neighbours who take the law into their own hands to protect their homes from scum as the justice/policing system has failed. Option 3 is continue as your are and rely on justice being served legally in time.

What do you do?

I would prefer to have the right to shoot the bastards.

To argue your point: how would you like to be wrongly on the receiving end of 'vigilante justice' say in a case of mistaken identity? Would you not prefer your right to a fair trial?

History has proven that witch hunts don't work, however I agree that certain scumbags would be known by the local community and should be dealt with but at what point should we give up our freedom in favour of this?

Steve · 22-12-2008 12:55am

gurramok wrote: »

These?

No, not specifically. I doubt they are operating without the approval of who I was thinking of.

The_Minister · 22-12-2008 12:57am

I'd like to remind everyone that we already had vigilantes in this country. They went around beating drug dealers, and beat a few innocent people to within an inch of their lives.
Why?
Because if you know that people are beating up people on rumour, it's easy to put out the word on someone and have someone else do your work.
And once you have an organised group willing to deal out violent 'justice', then unless you have a very strong, centred leader, you have a recipe for murder.

Just think of it like this; would you give the powers of the vigilante to the Gardai?
Would you let them enter your house without a warrent?
Would you let them determine guilt without firm evidence or forensics, and deal out a potentially lethal beating?

Do you really think that a random group of self-selecting, violent men, operating without safeguards, without standards of evidence, without forensics, without any standards for witnesses, are better capable at determining guilt than a court with a judge and jury?
Do you think the dogs on the street are infallible?, and would you not fear the bang on the door if they determining what was acceptable and what wasn't?

[Jackass] wrote: »

The law works, but sometimes it fails through technicalitys, then it's up to the people. Sort it out.

The problem with that thinking is, if you let things pass, then they become acceptable.
Eg: A warrent is just a day out of date. If the judge allows that, then the warrents are extended by a day. After that, why not two days?

gurramok · 22-12-2008 1:10am

SteveC wrote: »

I like what you did there..:D
To argue your point: how would you like to be wrongly on the receiving end of 'vigilante justice' say in a case of mistaken identity? Would you not prefer your right to a fair trial?

I doubt this has happened so often, margin of error being very low. We're talking about local people knowing what local people are up to.

SteveC wrote: »

History has proven that witch hunts don't work, however I agree that certain scumbags would be known by the local community and should be dealt with but at what point should we give up our freedom in favour of this?

Good question. Thats why its imperative that the justice system works to prevent to rise of vigilantes.
The way society is, don't be surprised if Guardian Angels New York style appeared on our streets.
Thats what i'd support. If however the gardai are so ineffective that the reporting by guardian angel style protectors of dodgy activity is ignored, its gives rise to mob rule and that i'd wouldn't blame badly affected communities resorting to.

Karl Hungus · 22-12-2008 1:20am

I think people love the idea of the vigilante, we do hear of the criminals slipping through the cracks, people getting let off with slaps on the wrist, and in fiction this romanticized idea of justice being served has really taken wing. I think Alan Moore's Watchmen was the closest thing to the reality of a superhero like Batman, in that Rorschach was pretty much a demented psychopath.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UJz0O2NjOo

I think most people love the idea of Dexter too, but if someone did what he did in reality, you wouldn't find too many supporting his actions.

thelordofcheese · 22-12-2008 1:20am

gurramok wrote: »

Scenario.

You live in a downtrodden area with serious anti-social disorder where your home and your kids are attacked on a daily basis. You name it, windows being bricked in, your car constantly damaged, you cannot sleep at night due to harassment, your kids being physically attacked on the street where fear is in their eyes.

You call the gards and after about 20 tries, they catch a couple of the perpetrators and the courts let them go constantly because they are too young.

You have options. Option 1 is to move out but you need someone to buy your house. Option 2 is a batch of vigilantes formed from a few neighbours who take the law into their own hands to protect their homes from scum as the justice/policing system has failed. Option 3 is continue as your are and rely on justice being served legally in time.

What do you do?

i choose 4:

4] i stop inventing clichéd scenarios where my point of view is hamfistedly painted as the one i want you to pick.

Davidius · 22-12-2008 1:22am

I'm a master engineer, detective and scientist.

All I need is money and physical prowess and then I'll be Batman.

Oh and I need to be 6ft tall.

Takk · 22-12-2008 1:22am

Kent: Mr. Simpson, how do you respond to the charges that petty
vandalism such as graffiti is down eighty percent, while heavy
sack-beatings are up a shocking nine hundred percent?

Homer: Aw, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent.
Forty percent of all people know that.

Kent: I see. Well, what do you say to the accusation that your group
has been causing more crimes than it's been preventing?

Homer: I]amused[/I Oh, Kent, I'd be lying if I said my men weren't
committing crimes.

Kent: I]pause[/I Well, touche'.

...

Steve · 22-12-2008 1:27am

gurramok wrote: »

I doubt this has happened so often, margin of error being very low. We're talking about local people knowing what local people are up to.

How many times does it have to happen before it becomes wrong? Are you saying (to quote the Americans) there should be acceptable losses?

Good question. Thats why its imperative that the justice system works to prevent to rise of vigilantes.
The way society is, don't be surprised if Guardian Angels New York style appeared on our streets.
Thats what i'd support. If however the gardai are so ineffective that the reporting by guardian angel style protectors of dodgy activity is ignored, its gives rise to mob rule and that i'd wouldn't blame badly affected communities resorting to.

I don't know what the Guardian Angels do but a major problem here is people report stuff to the Guards and are then unwilling to follow it through as a witness in a court case.
We can't really blame the guards for not wanting to bring something to court that they know won't be convicted.

Sharpshooter · 22-12-2008 1:33am

Karl Hungus wrote: »

I think people love the idea of the vigilante, we do hear of the criminals slipping through the cracks, people getting let off with slaps on the wrist, and in fiction this romanticized idea of justice being served has really taken wing. I think Alan Moore's Watchmen was the closest thing to the reality of a superhero like Batman, in that Rorschach was pretty much a demented psychopath.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UJz0O2NjOo

I think most people love the idea of Dexter too, but if someone did what he did in reality, you wouldn't find too many supporting his actions.

True , but then Dexter is romantisized to the hilt.

We the viewer can see why he does it , and the reason behind it.
He is never wrong, so he is right as far as the viewer is concerned.
It is a one sided view that gets represented to the viewer.
/ note , I love the programme , as it is not real life.

The_Minister · 22-12-2008 1:37am

sharpshooterH wrote: »

True , but then Dexter is romantisized to the hilt.

We the viewer can see why he does it , and the reason behind it.
He is never wrong, so he is right as far as the viewer is concerned.
It is a one sided view that gets represented to the viewer.
/ note , I love the programme , as it is not real life.

You damn well better love it.
/Glances meaningfully to his profile bar.

gurramok · 22-12-2008 1:37am

thelordofcheese wrote:

i stop inventing clichéd scenarios where my point of view is hamfistedly painted as the one i want you to pick.

No, its a real world scenario which affects countless families. We had one recently in East Wall, Dublin.

SteveC wrote: »

How many times does it have to happen before it becomes wrong? Are you saying (to quote the Americans) there should be acceptable losses?

Yes, there are acceptable losses. If the majority of cases are dealt with, then the overall justifies the means unfortunately.

SteveC wrote: »

I don't know what the Guardian Angels do but a major problem here is people report stuff to the Guards and are then unwilling to follow it through as a witness in a court case.
We can't really blame the guards for not wanting to bring something to court that they know won't be convicted.

What i'm getting at is as well as the lack of follow-up in court cases, in some areas you'd be lucky to see a garda appearing to your concerns within the hour and dealing with the issue.

Guess whats needed is an 80's style Mr Punisher, aka Dolph Lungren(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolph_Lundgren ) when the justice system fails

Sharpshooter · 22-12-2008 1:48am

The_Minister wrote: »

You damn well better love it.
/Glances meaningfully to his profile bar.

/Glances down at her feet.

It's a bloody good series , imo.

The_Minister · 22-12-2008 1:51am

gurramok wrote: »

Yes, there are acceptable losses. If the majority of cases are dealt with, then the overall justifies the means unfortunately.

Uh huh.
And if you are the poor soul whose head gets kicked in without justification?
Because the locals don't like you?
Maybe we should just run around scrawling the dragon's fang on people's doors?

How many permanently crippled innocents are acceptable to you?

The_Minister · 22-12-2008 1:52am

sharpshooterH wrote: »

/Glances down at her feet.

It's a bloody good series , imo.

Good girl.

Sharpshooter · 22-12-2008 2:01am

The_Minister wrote: »

Good girl.

Yes , Minister.

gurramok · 22-12-2008 2:10am

The_Minister wrote: »

Uh huh.
And if you are the poor soul whose head gets kicked in without justification?
Because the locals don't like you?
Maybe we should just run around scrawling the dragon's fang on people's doors?

How many permanently crippled innocents are acceptable to you?

I'm not talking about whose likes and dislikes who in a neighbourhood. I'm talking about a known person who is disliked for his illegal activities by his law abiding neighbours where the justice system has failed to incarcerate this person away from that community.
Not talking about somebody who is disliked because of red hair but of constant drug-dealing to your kids for example
You have to live a community like that to know what its like to resort to vigilantes.

Steve · 22-12-2008 2:35am

gurramok wrote: »

I'm not talking about whose likes and dislikes who in a neighbourhood. I'm talking about a known person who is disliked for his illegal activities by his law abiding neighbours where the justice system has failed to incarcerate this person away from that community.
Not talking about somebody who is disliked because of red hair but of constant drug-dealing to your kids for example
You have to live a community like that to know what its like to resort to vigilantes.

The theory behind this is good, in practice it would fail though. OK, you get rid of the drug dealer, next you get rid of the car thief, next the grafitti artist... eventually it would end up with 'justice' being handed out for spitting on the road or something. I don't agree with the current criminal justice system, it's severely flawed but I really don't think unaccountable vigilantes are the answer.

A good example is, when I was younger a scumbag tried to break into our house and was caught (stuck halfway through a small window with our dog attached to his face). We 'detained' him and called the cops. They arrived and basically said that if they arrested him then he'd walk out the next day and probably do the same again to someone else the following night. They also said that he could sue us because the dog attacked him and suggested in a roundabout way that the best course of action was to give him a good hiding and deposit him a few streets away.
I'm not going to say what happened but suffice to say the scumbag never returned to our area after that and probably to this day has a phobia about dogs.

What I'm getting at is yes, I do agree to some point with vigilantism but I still don't think it is right to base our society on it.
In clear cut cases it works but the line is very faint and allowing third parties to deal with 'scumbags' based on what they hear from their neighbours or local community is not somewhere I want to go.

Sharpshooter · 22-12-2008 2:47am

Same thing here SteveC , our house was broken into many years ago , and they kicked the s*it out of our dog, ( Pomeranian , very small breed ).
Anyway , the guard as much as said to my dad " if they break into your home , at night , and they haven't turned on a light , and you catch them and beat the holy hell out of them, and throw them out into the street , there is not a lot they can do to bring a prosecution against you .
Because they cannot identify any part of your home , as in what is inside it , they cannot say you attacked them there.

My dad shook that mans hand , and rightly so.:)

Flipz4Rollz · 22-12-2008 2:48am

I've never understood why Batman never used guns, Would be a lot easier than doing all that karate ****e

Sharpshooter · 22-12-2008 3:07am

Flipz4Rollz wrote: »

I've never understood why Batman never used guns, Would be a lot easier than doing all that karate ****e

Because , Batman wasn't a Vigilante.;)

the_syco · 22-12-2008 3:24am

Power corrupts.

Vigilantes will gain power, wipe out the crime gangs, see (in the recession) that the crime gangs make serious dosh, and start to bend a few rules. Shortly thereafter, the vigilante group becomes the problem.

The only solution is if someone with no family ties buys a lot of guns, and goes on a rampage killing the "bad guys" left, right, and centre.

Ah, yes, that really describes Batman, doesn't it...?

:cool:;)

[Jackass] wrote: »

But for example, if I knew there was a pedo or rapist or drug dealer or some sh*t in the area who got off cause of "lack of evidence" or some sh*t, but it's common knowledge that some sh*t went down, I would have no problem with the lad been given the ultimate hiding of his life and being told that if he didn't disapear he'd be made disapear.

You split up with the young wan who's brother is in the vigilante group. She calls you a rapist, and what? You get a hiding because you split up with some b|tch? To hell with that!

shut up! · 22-12-2008 3:27am

Great name for a band.

Ruu_Old · 22-12-2008 3:30am

Paul Kersey visits Ireland, oh yes!

Mrmoe · 22-12-2008 3:33am

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

I think that we should get a group of people together, get some baseball bats and sort 'em out!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

I think thats a great idea, the voices in my head are always telling me to go out and meet new people.It rubs the lotion on the skin.

What do you think of Vigilantes?

Comments