Vigilantes

[ibakecakes]

Just finished reading a book that describes the action taken by a group of mothers who's town is torn apart by the brutal murders and sexual assaults on 5 of their children. Although the book was fiction, the writer describes the powerful emotions felt by the families as she herself was subject to years of assault at the hands of a family member.
My question is, do you think that there is ever any justification for vigilante action? If you were one of the parents involved, would you allow the police to (hopefully) bring the person to justice? Would you risk your own freedom in order to get revenge?

[chopper]

me myself..i think vigilanteism is needed in some parts of our society..when i was a kid..there was hardly any housebreaking or muggings in the rough area were i lived.. cos the tough familys or gangsters that lived there wouldnt allow it..and the police didnt feck about them days either..it was a truncheon over the head instead of an asbo.. the streets were very safe for women to walk at any time of night or day..but sadly now ..all this has changed..with the rise of the mother coddled chav who the law favours and protects..and the usless soft community police officers who protect them..now the streets are more dangerous than ever..i think gangs of vigalantes is what we need to clean up our streets of filth and scum..or at least squads of guardian angels..like they use to have in the new york underground..todays police aint doing a good job..so somthing needs to be done..

[HannaSolo]

There's a difference between community self-defence leagues and such that have a presence on dangerous streets to STOP crimes and vigilantes (especially mobs) that hunt down and punish "offenders" summarily. Because the risk of an angry mob being wrong about the guilt of a particular person is too great. They'd tend to work with rumour and stereotype, in my opinion, and they'd pick easy targets - the neighbourhood oddball or unpleasant character. With a few exceptions, the serial predators like the OP is talking about get away with their crimes for so long because they fly under the radar. People don't suspect them because they look and act "normal." That's why I think vigilantism is a bad idea.

[restless_native]

This is complicated. I came from a background where you were taught to stand up for yourself and sort out your own problems without involving the police as it wasn't really acceptable to do that.

However, I don't believe that vigilantes are the answer in an ideal world. The fundamental problem we have with our justice system seems to be that a large proportion of police officers are bone idle morons. This is what needs to be addressed.

[Jo van]

There was a thread about this on POF when I first joined, with fairly predictable results....

Like RN said, we all like to think we're capable of "looking after ourselves".
I've "taken the law into my own hands" , on more than one occasion.
Where I lived for 20 years was right next to a quite rough council estate, full of Chop's Favourite chavs and car thieves. I had two cars stolen (One burnt out, one recovered crashed) and 5 other car break-ins, one where I lost my briefcase and it's contents, after stupidly leaving it in the car.
Before they successfully nicked the 'Cosworth', I caught one trying to break in, and chased him for about a mile with a pick-axe handle, he didn't seem very "keen"...

There's a lot of misinformation out there, about what you're "allowed" to do as far as "Citizen's arrests" are concerned, but my advice would be, if you're capable of 'handling yourself', (and you really do need to be realistic about that, NO "wishful thinking"!) then as long as you don't use "unreasonable force", you're perfectly entitled to hold someone, until the police arrive. You are not allowed to hit them, kick the sh1t out of them, or 'rough them up'... tempting, though it may be! The last time I did it (2005), I was charged with assault, but the CPS dropped it because there were enough witnesses to say I hadn't used "excessive force". I just held him.

As far as the more widely accepted versions of vigilantes, in gangs, with pitchforks and flaming torches go,
They generally get it wrong, as Hanna said, working on rumour and hearsay.
I think there was a case in the north last year when a supposed "Paedophile" was murdered by such a gang, but it turned out to be a distortion of some incident years before, in other words they got it completely wrong.

As we see on the forums, a strange "bidding war" breaks out, where people try to outdo each other in their revulsion, and this can drive the simpleton to idiotic extremes, without a shred of actual evidence, with tragic consequences.

Our legal system isn't perfect, but on balance, I think I prefer some sort of "Trial", and "Judgement" to take place objectively, with evidence "for, and against", before any "Punishment" is meted out.

[saddle-tramp]

"kill them all... God will know his own"...

[apple]

Due to life experience I have zero tolerance for what the law doesnt do, and what criminals choose to.
Thats why my Glock 17 9mm is with me most places I go. I have good aim and 17 rounds.
Id rather be in jail than experience crap or watch people I love go through hell.
Bottom line.

[cyst & deceased]

It is a touchy subject. I just know that if I would have fought back when my first husband tried to kill me I'd be out by now. Of course that's no life for my kids. I heard recently that he is going back for a few years. I am pissy when people get away with stuff like that.


While I was in Memphis the guys I was with kept warning me what a dangerous place it was. Mind you I'm the only one in the group who is armed. At night we were surrounded by police. There must have been one cop for every five civies. Early mornings were bad though. I'd go out to smoke early in the courtyard and was approached by all sorts of bums, panhandlers, and drug dealers. The hotel staff was worried at first but they got over it when they saw those guys running away.

[saddle-tramp]

Due to life experience I have zero tolerance for what the law doesnt do, and what criminals choose to.
Thats why my Glock 17 9mm is with me most places I go. I have good aim and 17 rounds.
Id rather be in jail than experience crap or watch people I love go through hell.
Bottom line.

eh---ehhh..hhh... Margo...do me a slavour




Come her eand fk my brains out...in return I'll fk ye till ye faint....

And then we can go some shooting guns...

*so excited, can't even fkn type properly*

[chopper]

then as long as you don't use "unreasonable force", you're perfectly entitled to hold someone, until the police arrive. You are not allowed to hit them, kick the sh1t out of them, or 'rough them up'... tempting, though it may be! The last time I did it (2005), I was charged with assault, but the CPS dropped it because there were enough witnesses to say I hadn't used "excessive force". I just held him.

well this is more reason that vigilante gangs might be the answer..if you hold down some violent braindeaded thug who has just beat a 80 year man or woman to death..then the police come and arrest you for assault while the mugger gets vip treatment and alot of tea and sympathy from the courts and the do gooders..then that aint justice or right..vigilantes are just doing the job the police or courts wont do and dishing out justice to those that deserve it..