Vigilantes

What do you think of vigilantes? Do you know any? How do they justify their efforts? Are they right? Or do they do more harm than good in your opinion?

Seems to me they would prefer to instigate rather than prevent. What do you think?

I'm gonna rustle up the posse and hang 'em on the spot.

Do you mean like "Death Wish" with Charles Bronson?

Reality based rather than fiction, whatever that would be. There are probably different degrees and shades from black to white.

I don't know much about them though.

so you need to be more specific. Some people consider Neighborhood Watch or the Guardian Angels vigilantes. To others its the vigilantism when you shoot an intruder or carjacker. There are some who say the Minutemen or those who put out water for those passing through the desert from Mexico. To others until it gets to the lynching level, its not vigilantes. Its almost like saying racist...definition and context is crucial.

I for one do not consider the any of what I listed (including the Minutemen) vigilantes.

1. Some people consider Neighborhood Watch or the Guardian Angels vigilantes.

That could be, but wouldn't it depend on the chapter? Some might go over the line while most wouldn't. Let's say for example a Neighborhood Watch chapter sets up a sting and leaves keys in a car on the street in the hopes someone would try to steal it. That boarders on entrapment though it might be legal. Having not studied the Guardian Angels I can't say if they ever go over the line or not, but for the sake of argument, what if the do something similar to the above sting, or sell drugs to someone then make a citizen's arrest.

2. To others its the vigilantism when you shoot an intruder or carjacker.

That sounds like self defense to me, not vigilantism. However, if they cruised around hoping to shoot someone, that would be.

3. There are some who say the Minutemen....

I'd agree that they are. They do more than be present as a deterrent. They actively detain. However, it doesn't seem they do stings, such as telling some it is safe to cross the border and then arrest them.

4. or those who put out water for those passing through the desert from Mexico.

That's pretty non squirter. How does it fit in at all?

5. To others until it gets to the lynching level, its not vigilantes.

So you argue that unless they severely break the law, they are not vigilantes. That forces me to look it up:

vigilante n. someone who takes the law into his/her own hands by trying and/or punishing another person without any legal authority. In the 1800s groups of vigilantes dispensed "frontier justice" by holding trials of accused horse-thieves, rustlers and shooters, and then promptly hanging the accused if "convicted." A mother who shoots the alleged molester of her child is a vigilante.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Vigilantes

No, that's not what I mean because it is too obvious. Here is another Webster's definition:

Main Entry: vig·i·lan·te
Pronunciation: "vi-j&-'lan-tE
Function: noun
Etymology: Spanish, watchman, guard, from vigilante vigilant, from Latin vigilant-, vigilans
: a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily (as when the processes of law appear inadequate); broadly : a self-appointed doer of justice

There are a lot of ways to be a self-appointed doer of justice without actually holding an ad hoc trial and then administering punishment. For example, someone posted elsewhere that she got a man fired because of his criminal record.

6. Its almost like saying racist...definition and context is crucial.

Good point and I truthfully am not sure how I mean it. The question, maybe, is can a country lean toward fascism without the population condoning at least the attitude of vigilantism? Can a country lean to the right without this tendency? And there was probably the same attitude under Stalin. Is there a line there somewhere?

since you seem quite unclear in your initial post what kind of vigilantes you mean.

All those examples I cited are areas where an argument of illegality can be made, but with the exception of lynching, it is normally not illegal. A couple of minor disagreements:

Neighborhood Watch groups do not do bait cars. Cops and can do, and it is not considered entrapment.

Guardian Angels do no do citizens arrests for drugs. There have been a few incidents where they have been accused of crossing the line.

Shooting an intruder is not vigilantism. If it is unjustified, its called murder or manslaughter depending on the circumstances. Capturing them and torturing them would be. As I recall there was a movie with that theme a while back.

There is no indication that the Minutemen are inflicting punishment for a crime (the key determinate of vigilantism). Some of their more extreme fellow travelers have gone over the line and been punished for it.

Putting out water for border crossers can be construed as aiding and abetting. While that might be true, letting a human being die of thirst in the desert is quite a bit worse.

I do not agree that it has to be a large/flagrant before its vigilantism, its that it has to include private/extra legal punishment.


Vigilantism is quite rare these days in the US and other western nations. Like race crimes the term is tossed around a lot without understanding its meaning.

To return to you original question, having not seen anything that qualified as vigilantism in the US in my lifetime, its hard to say.

If you equate the killing of hostages and kidnap victims in the Middle East to vigilantism, then clearly its not a good thing.

And only offered suggestions of how some could go over the line and stated I am not talking about the extreme legal definition. If a Neighborhood Watch chapter could bait car thieves, why shouldn't they? Or should they? If the Guardian Angels could sell a piece of soap as crack and then place them under citizen's arrest, why shouldn't they? Or should they?

You are evidently drawing the line with legality. That implies they can do anything provided it is legal, even if it interferes with other, potentially more effective solutions. So, if I understand correctly, you think the only line is if their actions are legal. Legally, that is true, but effectively, it could be questionable. For example, there is valid debate if the Minutemen are actually effective even if they never break the law. Some could argue they are actually more of a problem than a solution.

Which ones do you mean?

I suppose that some of them must fail, and perhaps some of them fail ignominiously, in ways that mean we never learn of their efforts.

But as to the original question, how I feel about vigilantes would depend upon what they try to do, and what they actually accomplish. The person who is on the scene before the police or fire department, or who crosses the yellow tape to save a life, is the sort of vigilante--maybe--that we could all get behind. Someone who mounts a vendetta, or tries to kill his quarry, is less defensible.

I'd like to hear specifics of what the original poster was thinking about. I don't believe the question can be answered coherently without more information.

Orsino, helping someone at an accident, saving someone from a burning building or stopping someone from snatching child wouldn't be vigilantism, I don't think.

Maybe I mean nosey vigilantism. Here is a google quick list, and the vigilantism in the Philipines is extreme but it does signify what it can lead to. Dunno, there just seems to be an atmosphere of vigilantism.

Cops: Handicap space vigilante rammed couple, ran into woman1-2444
By Brock Parker/ Somerville Journal
Thursday, June 8, 2006 - Updated: 04:02 AM EST

Ho, ho, hold on! A Somerville woman is accused of ramming two patrons at a Christmas Tree Shop in a fit of anger after they parked in a handicapped spot.

But store employees had suggested they park there to begin with to load an item, police said.

That didn’t stop Jeanne Walsh, 46, of Somerville from attempting to run down a woman outside the store using her hulking SUV, police said.

Her road rage has resulted in charges of attempted murder, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and negligent operation of a vehicle.

http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=142675

Lone gunman executes ex-con 'vigilante style' (Philipines)

The Freeman 06/08/2006

An ex-convict fell victim to another suspected vigilante attack when he was shot dead by a lone motorcycle-riding gunman while watching his friends playing dama shortly before noon yesterday along T. Padilla Extension near the Tejero barangay hall.

Niel Borinaga, 28, died on the spot after sustaining two gunshot wounds in his head. He was reported to be the 163rd victim of summary executions in the city that started since late December 2004.

Acting Cebu City Police Office chief Melvin Gayotin directed the Homicide Section to immediately conduct further investigation into Borinaga's killing.

http://www.philstar.com/philstar/Freeman200606081801.htm

Activist jailed amid questions of police impersonation
Associated Press

CLEVELAND - A man who has worked to keep kids away from gangs and drugs is in jail while police investigate whether he and four other men took their mission to the point of vigilantism.

Anton Billings, known in the community as the Rev. Twan Billings, was being held on suspicion of kidnapping, aggravated burglary and impersonation of law officers. He and the others were detained Tuesday, but none had been charged as of Thursday night.

People under investigation generally are held for questioning no longer than 24 hours, but that can be extended depending on the circumstances, police spokesman Lt. Thomas Stacho said Thursday.

Billings, a former gang member, occasionally talked with police about gang issues and went to the police department last week for a meeting he requested, Stacho said. Billings and two other men were wearing fatigue pants, dark shirts with gold lettering that had 'agent' written on them, fatigue pants and badges around their necks with ranks like chief and sergeant, the spokesman said.

http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/news/state/14773394.htm


Undercover civilians fight child molestation online
Stings target predators; some say it borders on vigilantism
Associated Press
Originally published May 28, 2006
BOSTON // This was Stacey DeLuca's plan: Chat online with child predators while pretending to be a young girl. Just for a few hours.

"I'd rather have them talk to me than a real 13-year-old," the 21-year-old said.

It didn't take long before a 50-year-old California man told DeLuca - who was posing as 13-year-old "Jess" from Massachusetts - that he likes "younger girls" and that she wouldn't be his first, DeLuca said.

...

Critics say it borders on vigilantism. Criminal defense attorneys argue that it amounts to entrapment and that the nature of the charges - rather than the weight of evidence - leads people to plead guilty to avoid publicity.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/technology/bal-te.vigilantes28may28,0,1169549.story?coll=bal-technology-headlines

Tougher libel laws may be needed to combat cyber vigilantes, lawyers warn
By Frances Gibb, Times Legal Editor, for Times Online

The libel laws are in need of reform to cope with the new menace of "cyber-vigilantism", lawyers said yesterday.

In one case that is the talk of internet chatrooms, a teenager has been publicly humiliated and vilified after incurring the fury of a buyer who bought his laptop and then claimed it was defective.

The buyer wreaked his revenge by setting up a fake website apparently in the name of the Amir Tofangsazan, using personal information as well as pornographic images that the buyer claims he found on the computer hard-drive. The site is being investigated by police.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,200-2205289,00.html

They might think they have the best of intentions but they don't always act on the most reliable information.