Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Vigilantism

24567

Comments

  • #32
    Arrow.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 153 ✭✭Arrow.


    Smyth wrote: »
    But then where will we get our precious drugs?

    You can grow your own for self consumption.


  • #33
    Arrow.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 153 ✭✭Arrow.


    Hedgemeister wrote: »
    Where's Charles Bronson when he's needed ?

    Last I heard he was on his way down to Emmet's fix-it shop.


  • #34
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    bit monkey wrote: »
    Exactly.

    These so called 'drug lords' are just people. These guys are built up in the press as some kind of 'untouchables'. People are easily dealt with if the will is there.

    So you think murder is the answer? Would you commit these murders yourself or would you expect someone else to do it? If you do commit the murders yourself what then makes you better than the junkies and drug dealers?


  • #35
    Arrow.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 153 ✭✭Arrow.


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So you think murder is the answer? Would you commit these murders yourself or would you expect someone else to do it? If you do commit the murders yourself what then makes you better than the junkies and drug dealers?

    I'd be better because I'm not profiting on the misery of others. I don't intimidate, steal, sell drugs - contributing to the deaths of innocents while heaping misery on their families.

    Can you really not tell the difference?

    Also, I'm not saying vigilantism is the answer. Just playing devil's advocate to a degree. Read my OP again.


  • #36
    arybvtcw0eolkf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,608 ✭✭✭✭arybvtcw0eolkf


    bumper234 wrote: »
    And the moment someone dies?

    And............ (where's the punchline /pardon the pun)?.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Splat Strawberry Jam
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 68 ✭✭Splat Strawberry Jam


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Cool, and what happens when someone (not a junkie) gets set upon by a group because they "look" like they are going to commit a crime? What happens when mob mentality takes over and what starts out as a few slaps turns into the dead body of some innocent person?

    I could re-write your message and simply swap the protagonists around. I would estimate it is more likely a scumbag will do harm than a neighbourhood group protecting their area.

    Do you think the statusw quo is working at the moment? Ever walked down Talbot Street? Or do you prefer innocent members of the public be menaced? I say lets start knocking some heads. Any trouble i have ever had with scumbags usually dissipates when they realise i am ready to take them on. Bunch of weak pansies


  • #38
    MonstaMash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,425 ✭✭✭MonstaMash


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Cool, and what happens when someone (not a junkie) gets set upon by a group because they "look" like they are going to commit a crime? What happens when mob mentality takes over and what starts out as a few slaps turns into the dead body of some innocent person?
    Collateral damage...if it's OK for governments to abuse the term, why not vigilantes?


  • #39
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Why are people generally (here and in that other thread) so shortsighted, so as to not see it's a problem created by a general lack of jobs and future-prospects for a lot of people, and that the solution is to provide adequate employment and educational opportunities, so people don't resort to or fall into crime and drug-taking/dealing?

    These 'scumbags/junkies', i.e. people, are capable of actually contributing usefully to society, if actually give the opportunity - some of them will probably be stuck in their ways and need more effort to reform, but you're sure as hell not going to reform any of them, unless you get them jobs, and thus the ability to have some non-homeless/drug-dealing based future prospects.

    Government has all the ability and funding capabilities it needs, to provide ample jobs (with a large jobs program), and boost public services, including AGS and drug/health/mental-health treatment, needed for resolving all of this.

    These are real solutions, not shortsighted ones that only move the problem around, or just deal with symptomatic problems rather than root problems.


  • #40
    iDave
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,750 ✭✭✭iDave


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Why are people generally (here and in that other thread) so shortsighted, so as to not see it's a problem created by a general lack of jobs and future-prospects for a lot of people, and that the solution is to provide adequate employment and educational opportunities, so people don't resort to or fall into crime and drug-taking/dealing?

    These 'scumbags/junkies', i.e. people, are capable of actually contributing usefully to society, if actually give the opportunity - some of them will probably be stuck in their ways and need more effort to reform, but you're sure as hell not going to reform any of them, unless you get them jobs, and thus the ability to have some non-homeless/drug-dealing based future prospects.

    Government has all the ability and funding capabilities it needs, to provide ample jobs (with a large jobs program), and boost public services, including AGS and drug/health/mental-health treatment, needed for resolving all of this.

    These are real solutions, not shortsighted ones that only move the problem around, or just deal with symptomatic problems rather than root problems.

    I wish it was that simple but a lot these people existed when jobs were in abundance.


  • #41
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    bit monkey wrote: »
    I'd be better because I'm not profiting on the misery of others. I don't intimidate, steal, sell drugs - contributing to the deaths of innocents while heaping misery on their families.

    Can you really not tell the difference?

    Also, I'm not saying vigilantism is the answer. Just playing devil's advocate to a degree. Read my OP again.

    But what happens when an innocent person DOES get killed? You haven't answered whether you would commit these killings yourself or expect others to do the dirty work.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Splat Strawberry Jam
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 68 ✭✭Splat Strawberry Jam


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Why are people generally (here and in that other thread) so shortsighted, so as to not see it's a problem created by a general lack of jobs and future-prospects for a lot of people, and that the solution is to provide adequate employment and educational opportunities, so people don't resort to or fall into crime and drug-taking/dealing?

    These 'scumbags/junkies', i.e. people, are capable of actually contributing usefully to society, if actually give the opportunity - some of them will probably be stuck in their ways and need more effort to reform, but you're sure as hell not going to reform any of them, unless you get them jobs, and thus the ability to have some non-homeless/drug-dealing based future prospects.

    Government has all the ability and funding capabilities it needs, to provide ample jobs (with a large jobs program), and boost public services, including AGS and drug/health/mental-health treatment, needed for resolving all of this.

    These are real solutions, not shortsighted ones that only move the problem around, or just deal with symptomatic problems rather than root problems.

    I dont think sensible social policies and zero tolerance need to be mutually exclusive


  • #43
    arybvtcw0eolkf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,608 ✭✭✭✭arybvtcw0eolkf


    Splat Strawberry Jam wrote: »
    Do you think the statusw quo is working at the moment? Ever walked down Talbot Street? Or do you prefer innocent members of the public be menaced? I say lets start knocking some heads. Any trouble i have ever had with scumbags usually dissipates when they realise i am ready to take them on. Bunch of weak pansies

    If that was you kicking the heads off the two junkie scum in the famous "leave it out" video I salute you sir :cool:


  • #44
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    iDave wrote: »
    I wish it was that simple but a lot these people existed when jobs were in abundance.
    Then why is the problem so much worse now? Evidently there are a lot more people like this now, and it's happened since the economic crisis and increased in unemployment began - that's not just a co-incidence.


  • #45
    Arrow.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 153 ✭✭Arrow.


    bumper234 wrote: »
    But what happens when an innocent person DOES get killed? You haven't answered whether you would commit these killings yourself or expect others to do the dirty work.

    If I had to, if I felt it was the right thing and there was no other way. I would do it. That I'm certain.

    An innocent person? I'm speaking hypothetically - wiping out those who aren't innocent.

    People know who's who in those circles.


  • #46
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Splat Strawberry Jam wrote: »
    I dont think sensible social policies and zero tolerance need to be mutually exclusive
    They aren't, but if you have sensible social policies, and a will funded AGS, you don't need or want any vigilantism.


  • #47
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Splat Strawberry Jam wrote: »
    I could re-write your message and simply swap the protagonists around. I would estimate it is more likely a scumbag will do harm than a neighbourhood group protecting their area.

    Do you think the statusw quo is working at the moment? Ever walked down Talbot Street? Or do you prefer innocent members of the public be menaced? I say lets start knocking some heads. Any trouble i have ever had with scumbags usually dissipates when they realise i am ready to take them on. Bunch of weak pansies

    But innocent people DO get killed.

    Vigilante jailed for killing man he mistakenly thought was paedophile

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/28/vigilante-lee-james-life-murdering-bijan-ebrahimi

    Newcastle man jailed for vigilante murder of Dennis Griffin

    http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/20193511/newcastle-man-jailed-for-vigilante-murder-of-dennis-griffin/

    So again i ask you what happens WHEN an innocent person gets killed?


  • #48
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,424 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Splat Strawberry Jam wrote: »
    If you're going to make an omlette you have to break some eggs.

    What in the fúck does that mean in relation to the topic at hand? You are saying we have to kill someone to save them and others like them? fúcking nuts.

    You don't fix a problem moving them around and hiding it, or taking your frustration out and beating up others you perceive to be the problem.

    "Violence is all they understand," is a bit of a shít catch phrase to go by if you're thinking about pushing it too. They won't understand any different, if you provide it to'em, from mobs no less as well.


  • #49
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    MonstaMash wrote: »
    Collateral damage...if it's OK for governments to abuse the term, why not vigilantes?

    Which governments because i have never heard any Irish minister use that term for murder.


  • #50
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    bit monkey wrote: »
    If I had to, if I felt it was the right thing and there was no other way. I would do it. That I'm certain.

    An innocent person? I'm speaking hypothetically - wiping out those who aren't innocent.

    People know who's who in those circles.

    LOL at internet warriors, have you ever killed anyone? Do you think it's like in the movies where you just pull the trigger and live happily ever after? Who decides who dies? Do you hold a special little kangaroo court? Will you model yourself on the Nazi ideals or the KKK?


  • #51
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,801 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    I predict that heavy sack beatings will increase a shocking 900%


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Quick solution:
    legalize heroin, no junkies in the city centre on the rob, goofing off or scoring gear


  • #53
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,424 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Which governments because i have never heard any Irish minister use that term for murder.

    He's getting mixed up with movies.


  • #54
    anncoates
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,925 ✭✭✭✭anncoates


    There's definitely a gap in the violent working class vigilantism market now that so many Sinn Finn members have started wearing suits or become "community workers".


  • #55
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    I agree with Bumper, it's grand until they get the wrong person, an innocent person

    Could you live with yourself if you attacked or even killed an innocent man or woman?


  • #56
    MonstaMash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,425 ✭✭✭MonstaMash


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Which governments because i have never heard any Irish minister use that term for murder.
    No one mentioned Irish ministers...

    Collateral damage is damage that is incidental to the intended target.

    The US government/military actively use the term where it can refer to the incidental destruction of civilian property and/or non-combatant casualties.


  • #57
    rossie1977
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,541 ✭✭✭✭rossie1977


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


  • #58
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    MonstaMash wrote: »
    No one mentioned Irish ministers...

    Collateral damage is damage that ais incidental to the intended target.

    The US government/military actively use the term where it can refer to the incidental destruction of civilian property and/or non-combatant casualties.

    Would you be ok with this collateral damage in regards to a vigilante group in Dublin/Ireland?


  • #59
    MonstaMash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,425 ✭✭✭MonstaMash


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    He's getting mixed up with movies.
    Unfortunately no...I am an ex-member of the military, who participated in active combat in a number of campaigns, unlike most of the civvies here :P


  • #60
    MonstaMash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,425 ✭✭✭MonstaMash


    Princess Petulia Pissy Pants wrote: »
    Would you be ok with this collateral damage in regards to a vigilante group in Dublin/Ireland?
    No...but it happens unfortunately


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Arrow.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 153 ✭✭Arrow.


    Princess Petulia Pissy Pants wrote: »
    I agree with Bumper, it's grand until they get the wrong person, an innocent person

    Could you live with yourself if you attacked or even killed an innocent man or woman?

    Some people are too quick to act. Stupid even. There would have to be absolutely no doubt and a ton of evidence to back it up.

    You can't just go around killing 'potential' drug dealers.

    I know you'll say 'but still, innocents are killed'. I don't believe with the right preparation you can harm someone who's innocent.

    It would be fairly obvious - to determine a drug dealer....I'd imagine.


Advertisement
Advertisement