I’m sure that this doesn’t have any bearing on what I said.
Interesting hypothesis. Now prove it. This time without a knee-jerk comment.
Ah, so you can’t prove your interesting hypothesis.
C’mon. In “Death Wish” didn’t Charles Bronson kill criminals actually engaging in crimes? And ignore those who might theoretically commit crimes?
Vigilantism values the pursuit of justice over the rule of law. I don’t think that’s such a bad thing.
Actually, vigilantism values the pursuit of personal revenge over either justice or the rule of law. That’s certainly a very bad thing.
Monty and foolsguinea, I’m going to disagree with both of your definitions.
I think a more complete definition of a vigilante is someone who pursues his or her ideas of a personal justice outside the bounds of the law.
This includes both your definitions, and emphasizes what bothers me about vigilanteism even at its best: Without the protection of the rule of law, everyone is equally at risk from someone else’s personal justice.
Only in comic books.
Sorry, but an individual can’t assume he or she knows what constitutes justice for a community or even for a particular victim. That is what the rule of law is for. Law serves justice. A vigilante serves nothing but his own sense of what is right.
My humble O is that some sex offenders are born that way, if so then is it a mental disorder, so killing them seems to be an effective cure.
So, you’re advocating execution for the mentally ill?
That my friend is the $1,000,000 question. What do we do with people who can never fit into society? Would it be a mercy killing?
So, which of the mentally ill have you determined “don’t fit in?” And who fits your definition of mentally ill?
I think you may have hit on a final solu… er, way of solving our problems.
Oh, and drop the “friend” B.S.
OK, you enemy you! I did mention it in a semi-sarcastic way. I really do think many if not most of these people have a mental condition which drives them to commit such acts. Perhaps it is part of the human condition that some people, even children might be violated as (somehow) a beneficial part of humanity, I really don’t know and don’t think anyone truly does.
Except that you want to treat a mental condition by lethal means. Thanks for providing a definition of overkill.
Send them to your house, they’d fit right in. Please send the check by next Thursday, as I’ve already put the downpayment on my mansion in anticipation.
While I too do not mourn the loss of registered, potentially repeat sex offenders, vigilantism is not to be applauded for all the reasons listed above, as well as the fact that it might encourage others to apply their own peculiar brand of justice.
That the offenders are released back into society and/or that their names are made public, I think, is a whole other thread topic.
As Bosda points out, this killer may branch out. He’s obviously a disturbed individual. For now he seems to be targetting (assuming the letter received by the newspaper is real, which seems unlikely considering the author referenced nothing unable to be garnered from the media) rapists and pedophiles, but who knows where he draws the line? His next victim might be some random guy at the mall whose passing gaze lingered a little too long for this guy’s liking on a 16 year old girl.
As much as I personally wish offenders such as those were not released back into society, this killer needs to be caught.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it turns out that this guy ends up claiming he was directed by some entity to cleanse the world of rapists and pedophiles.
The idea the ‘no one will miss them’ is something serial killers use to their advantage. Usually it’s prostitutes or other people on fringe of society. To the sick mind of the killer that is what makes OK to kill them.
Said what I’d hoped to get at much more succinctly than I.
The Green River Killer (from Washington also, known to have killed 48 prostitutes), after capture, said, “I thought I was doing you guys a favor, killing, killing the prostitutes. Here you guys can’t control them, but I can.”
Small note though, not all serial killers prey upon the dregs of society. Some of the more famous killed children and young, professional or student women. Just wanted to clarify before it became generically accepted in the conversation that all serial killers hid behind that questionable morality play.
Well…It won’t if you don’t make their adress available to the general public.
If you really want to find them and carry out the deed, the public display of an address won’t make any difference.
Sorry, that one went right over my head…
Ditto…
If this is a typical Great Debate, and if these are shorthand for previous responses, can someone enlighten me?
Remember the Monty Hall mathematics problem? Not a hijack, it serves as an example that something that is intuitive may not always be right; by replacing some of the parameters with others the real answer may reveal itself.
What if a Mom & Pop shopkeeper got sick of shoplifters and starting getting lists of them from the courts and shooting them? What if vigilantes went after other vigilantes? (Okay, I have no idea where I am going with the second example, but it is interesting, isn’t it?)
We’d probably agree that shooting convicted shoplifters was completely out of proportion to their crime. That the courts had decided. So at what level of transgression do we take the punishment into our own hands? IMHO, at no level whatsoever. The answer is to change the laws, or else be transgressors ourselves.
Besides, people are human, and mistakes get made. This thread dealt with Fox News’ airing a segment identifying a so-called radical Islamist. They got it wrong, but that didn’t stop a house from being defaced. I’d hate to get shot because I had the same name as a sex offender, or someone got the street number transposed. (Click on the link, and scroll down to **Larry Mudd’s ** comment, which may be one of the wittiest things I have read on this board in a while 
)
As an aside to the crime mentioned in the OP, the police think the letter may be a hoax, given that no “secret” info about the crime was revealed in the letter. However, my first thought on hearing of this story was that it was a vigilante. However, there’s no credible information that he’ll lift a gun against a sex offender again. Not that it’s not too late as far as two men are concerned…
Or if you didn’t let them rejoin society to begin with…
Seriously, addresses are a matter of public record. When a jealous ex-boyfriend of a past girlfriend had a private investigator follow me around and report to him my address so he could show up at 3am, that is exactly what the police told me concerning my belief that my privacy was violated.
It wouldn’t take a whole lot of research to connect names with addresses if the killer so chose. Having a working list just makes it easier.
Besides which, I’d much rather know there is a pedophile living next door to me before inviting him over for dinner with my niece.