If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms April Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
To your second point: All law other than "an eye for an eye" is arbitrary.
Is that the situation here? I thought the lady was trying to get her car back, and the killings were an unfortunate development not the goal. The OP states just that, the article is rather ambiguous.But this case is EXACTLY why governments insist they get to have a monopoly on violent justice.
Back when families engaged in vendettas, nobody really minded: it was just. They kill one of yours, you kill one of theirs, cool. To that extent, I don't have a personal problem with this car owner's urge to go cap those who had wronged her.
The problem is that vendettas between small groups of people with vested interests in the pursuit of justice for that crime? They ALWAYS end up involving bystanders, usually hurting them and often killing them. It's on behalf of those uninterested bystanders that the government steps in and asserts its right to dispense justice.
So because these bangers couldn't control their aim, it actually ends up strengthening the government in its insistence that vigilantes cannot be depended on.
Perhaps I misunderstood your point. The way I interpret your statement The life of a criminal is worth nothing, is that a criminal's life can be taken, as it is without value, with impunity.I'm struggling to understand the argument you're making here. You think I am saying something worth nothing must be destroyed on principle. I am saying that the destruction of something worth nothing requires no recompense.My
There is a causal relationship between the criminal act and the criminals' death in this case. If they were hanging out at the park and murdered by a random, I would say differently.
To your second point: All law other than "an eye for an eye" is arbitrary.
I disagree.What replaced horses…vehicles
World hasn’t changed , still the same rules as always. Only people have changed …
I agree that there is a difference between law and justice.Is that the situation here? I thought the lady was trying to get her car back, and the killings were an unfortunate development not the goal. The OP states just that, the article is rather ambiguous.
I think your point is fair but I also think it only works if the legal system/government is actually dispensing "justice". More and more people seem to be hip to the jive that that is not happening, so I do wonder if we will see more and more people trying to take matters into their own hands
Are you saying that a person that steals a car can/should be put to death, either by the state, or by the person who owned the car?
And, the "eye for an eye" maxim was a limitation on retribution, not a minimum.
I agree that there is a difference between law and justice.
Yes, I see the possibility of more people taking the law into their own hands, but that leads to two bad outcomes - vigilante justice, with the inherent excess and over-enthusiasm that that would bring, and the inevitable .gov reaction to become more controlling of people, at their request, for "security."
meh.Vigilante justice, very guilty. You really shouldn't go hunt someone down and insagate a confrontation.
While what you say is true...if they didn't commit the crime she wouldn't have had to do that shit...and realistically that is basic common sense. It can be a double edged sword of stupidity allowing vigilante justice. The system is not really set up for that.Given today's world, I can see this happening more and more, especially down South, where this woman would have more than likely been given a medal.
The Sheriff of Polk County would more than likely give her the highest civilian award for bravery and at the same time apologize profusely on the woman's behalf to the innocent bystander who inadvertently got struck by a round. I can hear him say that we, the police, can't be everywhere at all times but if the car wasn't stolen, we wouldn't be having this press conference now, would we?
The Sheriff of Polk County would ... apologize profusely on the woman's behalf to the innocent bystander who inadvertently got struck by a round. I can hear him say that we, the police, can't be everywhere at all times...
St Louis is not in MA but that certainly is not exercising your duty to retreat.
But in any state if you track somebody down and it turns into a gun fight I think you are screwed.
As soon as she spotted her stolen vehicle she should of just called the cops and let them deal with it.
Now that I have had some time to think about this it seems it is just ghetto rats being ghetto rats. Ghetto rats steel vehicle, ghetto rats try to retrieve vehicle all involved using ghetto rats mentality. Everyone is guilty.Vigilante justice, very guilty. You really shouldn't go hunt someone down and insagate a confrontation.
it`s all about RESPECT, man!Now that I have had some time to think about this it seems it is just ghetto rats being ghetto rats. Ghetto rats steel vehicle, ghetto rats try to retrieve vehicle all involved using ghetto rats mentality. Everyone is guilty.
Now that I have had some time to think about this it seems it is just ghetto rats being ghetto rats. Ghetto rats steel vehicle, ghetto rats try to retrieve vehicle all involved using ghetto rats mentality. Everyone is guilty.
Hollywood dosent make movies like that any more, unless it has lesbeions, gay guys or transvestites or some other sort of crazy DEI theme it dosent get made.It might be Ghetto Rat mentality, but I have to admit I'd feel the same way. Though I probably wouldn't go to that extreme. I would dream about it though. Sometimes when you know you can't depend on the police, you start to take matters into your own hands. Hell, without that kind of mentality Hollywood would have damn little material to make a movie. Most are about people doing things themselves to get justice.
He has basically in the recent past told the residents of the county that it would be okay with him if you took out a dirtbag who was looting your home after a major hurricane had struck FLA. Other press conferences that he has held regarding crimes against others, he has stated "fool or fvck around, you may or will find out" and he doesn't necessarily mean jail time! In my humble opinion, he advocates punishment outside of the courts when justified. I'm not going back reviewing his many press conferences regarding this. It would take to long as I'm very busy doing nothing most of the time.While what you say is true...if they didn't commit the crime she wouldn't have had to do that shit...and realistically that is basic common sense. It can be a double edged sword of stupidity allowing vigilante justice. The system is not really set up for that.
Im not so sure of this in FL......she got carjacked and lost her car, luckily survived. During the carjacking, if she was carrying, she has every right to fxcking shoot the a**h***s in the face, no harm no foul.
After the fact, you let LEO deal with the finding and getting the car back.......assuming you have insurance they should pay for a new car, as it was stolen.
I will admit in a lot of shitholes the cops do nothing........so its frustrating as hell I bet.
Maybe that would be better than chasing somebody down so you can engage them in a gun fight, but not much.Maybe if you ran around like Gomer yelling CITIZEN'S ARREST, CITIZEN'S ARREST it would work.
Once they realize guns are involved, they will find the time to deal with it."well, uh, we don't have time to deal with this."
Everyone says, "The Purge would be a great idea!"I remember going to the movie theater to watch Death Wish. When Bro son killed a bad guy people cheeered in the theater.
Fast forward to someone actually doing a Death Wish activity and it’s bad. Duality I guess. People like the idea but just do t want it to really happen.
I'm sure the lady was aware that she was most likely never going to see the car again or even if these guys got caught there would be no justice.While what you say is true...if they didn't commit the crime she wouldn't have had to do that shit...and realistically that is basic common sense. It can be a double edged sword of stupidity allowing vigilante justice. The system is not really set up for that.
Im not so sure of this in FL......she got carjacked and lost her car, luckily survived. During the carjacking, if she was carrying, she has every right to fxcking shoot the a**h***s in the face, no harm no foul.
After the fact, you let LEO deal with the finding and getting the car back.......assuming you have insurance they should pay for a new car, as it was stolen.
I will admit in a lot of shitholes the cops do nothing........so its frustrating as hell I bet.