Vigilanteism - Right or Wrong?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Divermedic, Mar 19, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I was talking to a bloke in the mess last night who is out the Army soon and is emigrating. I asked him why he was emigrating and he said he thought the UK was going down the toilet.As the beers flowed he explained how his granny had been beaten, robbed of her life savings and eventually died soon after the event. The arrse who did this was given community service, and a fine . He was a well known arrse in his community. So my drinking buddy was bitter and twisted about the justice system and the UK in general.

    So.... my question is , do you think that there will come a time in this country when honest decent people might just rely on the "community" to get the justice they seek rather than the Police and the courts? I don't know any coppers so I don't know what restrictions or limited resources they have. Do the Police give a toss or are they more likely to arrest me for hitting a burglar over the head with a frying pan than the actual burglar.

    Your thoughts please

  2. Robbery and murder - a fine and community service. Bullsh*t. You either made it up or your "friend" did.
  3. It's not that uncommon for elderly people to die as a result of the shock associated with an act of violence, not the violence itself and the scum to get away with it...... in fact chronic heart failure is commonly listed as a cause of death in many elderly people brought in due to trauma.


  4. The scrote that burgled me in 2001 was fined a tenner.

    He subsequently got a custodial sentence care of the NHS which should not have been necessary.
  5. Unfortunately many old people die after being attcked, mugged, conned or burgled. The problem is that in many of the cases, unless death occurs as a direct result of the injuries, those responsible cannot be charged with murder. Often there is not physical harm apparent and yet they die within a short time after the event.

    Vigilante behaviour is never right for it takes the rule of law out of the right hands and places it into those who would be both judge and jury. Some might say that this is 'direct' action but the question of right and wrong is in the eye of the beholder and becomes a moveable feast. It doesn't take much to find that instead of punishing and preventing crime that those who are vigilantes have become the criminals.

    I remember a case some years back where someone decided to stop a speeding car. They ran the car off the road and found that it contained a panicking husband and an 'in labour' mother. What he interpreted as a potential hazard was in fact someone trying to overcome a different problem.

    Leave keeping the law to those who are trained to do so but be part of a community that sets the conditions for law to be kept by standing up to bad behaviour and wrongdoers and supporting the police.

  6. I'm not advocating gangs of armed vigilantes patrolling our streets, but is becoming harder to support the Police when they seem very concerned with arresting toy shop owners for selling Golliwogs, arresting little old ladies for reading out names of soldiers killed in Iraq, and so on and on and onand onand on.....
  7. I suppose that the level of response should be dictated by the severity/type of crime committed.

    If we all believe what is reported by the various media these days, it is apparent that while the police do a great job of bringing as many alleged criminals to court the CPS do not always push for a conviction to the fullest extent of the law allows. It appears that the CPS are happier to guarantee a conviction on a lesser charge that usually goes hand in hand with a lower sentence rather than go all out for a conviction on a charge that would carry a sentence that would reflect the nature of the crime.

    When I read the newspapers, I read on an almost daily basis about some repeat offender who has just been convicted of mugging/burgling/stabbing/killing someone and has been handed a sentence completely disproportionate to their crime/s. I am sure that many people around the country are willing to take the law into their own hands if they think that there is a criminal in their midst that is committing crimes and effectively sticking two fingers up at the local community because they know that the courts are soft on them.

    If someone has their home broken into these days they are in fear of their lives, yet the law appears to side with the criminals. There was the case of the gentleman in London who was stabbed to death by a criminal that was on probation after having been allowed out of prison despite recommendations that he should remain inside in the interests of public safety. The laws of this country are there to protect the decent people of this country and punish the criminals but their intepretation by some people is making a mockery of the legal system and unneccessarily endangering law abiding British people.

    If someone breaks into my house they become a threat to my wife and children and also to me, I am willing to do whatever is neccessary to protect my family. I doubt that this would make me a vigilante.

    If sentences proportionate to the crime committed were handed out there would be no reason for people to feel that they have to take the law into their own hands.
  8. These days, the punishment does not fit the crime; violent and sexual offenders are given short sentances in prisons that resemble luxury hotels. Junkies find drugs are cheaper and easier to buy inside nick than on the streets! Kidde-fiddlers are protected at the taxpayer's expense and allowed to swop fantasies and techniques for avoiding detection. Most criminals serve only half their sentance and are then released to prey on real people once again.
    I obey the law. But I place the well-being of myself and my family above any law of God or man. If my family suffer a serious assualt, I will have no compuction about maiming or killing the perp. Nor would I hesitate to lie under oath, falsify evidence, threaten witnesses(and their families)or, in the most extreme situations, regard any police officer who attempted to arrest me as Collateral Damage.
    This is one instance where I agree with The Shrub; you're either with me or aginst me.
    Padre, this should sound familiar to you:
    "Love thy neighbour as thyself. But if thy neighbour comes to slay thee, rise up early - and slay him first."
    - Rabbi Akkiva.
  9. Oooh, that Akkiva was a bit hard wasn't he? Don't make clerics like that anymore (said he probably thankfully!).

    Legs (et al) I didn't think that you were advocating armed vigilantes or the like and yes. you're right about supporting the Police when they nick little old ladies who read out names of dead, or where I live - feed pigeons!

    The CPS and some of those who are paid to police this land need to wake up and smell something, that's for sure. The law does seem to offer protection to criminals - I read recently of a case where a young man was breaking into a house and damaged himself with the result that he sued the houseowner! Now that's pretty rich.

    All I am saying is that we need to become vigilant rather than vigilante! If we draw a line and decide, as a community, that wrong behaviour will stop, then it does. Look at the situation in King's Cross where residents blow whistles if they see drug dealing - wasn't long before the place was cleaned up.

    We must stand and resist bad acts where we find them. If we make life untenable for those who steal, drink and fight, abuse others and the like they do stop. Trouble is that we live in a 'fear rich' and 'risk averse' society. I believe that communities set the conditions for lawful behaviour - consider the 60's where if you did something wrong you got a clip around the ear from your local copper and a good seeing to from your Dad when he was told about it. Everyone watched you and stopped you before you did something and those who had reputations were actively 'encouraged' by the community - the bad elements knew the limits.

    Sorry if you thought I was having a pop - just want to make a difference not be part of the problem.

  10. msr

    msr LE

    Innocent until proven guilty.

  11. I can't speak for the rest of the US, however, here in California, the guy would be tried for murder. If the act you committed was the "proximate cause" of the persons death, within 3 years and 1 day of the incident, it is still murder. So, if you stab someone today, and it pierces their liver or something. They live for 2 years and then die, due to complications with the wound, the person can be tried for murder.

    This case sounds like a perfect example.
  12. no wonder crime was so low round your way... 8O
  13. I think there are two levels of vigilante. The first is the sort who actively seeks out alleged criminals and delas out their own form of justice. The second is the have-a-go hero who happens to be the victim or is witnessing a crime and does something to prevent or stop it occuring.

    The first instance is definitely stepping over the line and encroaching on the role of the police and the courts.

    The second is an extremely emotive area. I believe that the public should get more support from the law if they do something against a criminal who is actually committing a crime. There has to be a common sense limit, unfortunately this is frequently siding with the criminal who sues or is made out to be the victim of an attack. Could this be due to the CPS finding it easier to pursue a conviction against Mr Householder for assault as a burglar has two black eyes, rather than charging the would be burglar because he never got to steal anything?
  14. Deleted duplicate post! MLAR