In today’s media, people love vigilante justice, actually we root for vigilante justice. We have movies like Taken, where a man takes the law into his own hands and goes after the men who took his daughter, and in the wake of this he kills over thirty men. In the show Dexter, the main character is a smart and likeable guy who decides who is a bad person and then kills them. We watch these things and don’t think twice about the aspect of the law. In real life, vigilante justice is and incredibly slippery slope that we as a society should avoid at all cost. In this paper I will discuss what a vigilante is, give multiple examples of real life vigilante justice, discuss the benefits and consequences of vigilante justice, then conclude with why
…show more content…
In the world, we have countless amounts of different society’s, cultures, and morals. With so many different ways of thinking, who is to decide which way is right and which way is wrong? One culture, could deem that having sex out of wedlock is incredibly taboo, find out a couple that is from a different culture does not see it as a bad thing. With one person finding it’s wrong, they could go and kill this couple just because he finds it wrong, even though the couple could see absolutely nothing wrong with their actions. In a situation like this, who is the one that decides who was right and who was wrong? The Department of Justice found that Hank Eisses and Victor Vazquez had served their time and paid for their crimes. They also had been law abiding citizens for years after being released from prison, but Michael Mullen thought that he knew more than the law and murdered the two men because of his thought of the law. Bernhard Goetz was not happy with all of the subway crime that was going on in the city of New York, and decided to take the law into his own hands by shooting 4 boys on the subway who asked for $5 and said it with a smirk. With Vigilante justice, we have no way to decide whose thoughts are right and whose thoughts are wrong. Some people who commit vigilante justice, may think they are doing the right thing, but that does not make it legal, or for that matter wrong in other people’s
In the world, we have countless amounts of different society’s, cultures, and morals. With so many different ways of thinking, who is to decide which way is right and which way is wrong? One culture, could deem that having sex out of wedlock is incredibly taboo, find out a couple that is from a different culture does not see it as a bad thing. With one person finding it’s wrong, they could go and kill this couple just because he finds it wrong, even though the couple could see absolutely nothing wrong with their actions. In a situation like this, who is the one that decides who was right and who was wrong? The Department of Justice found that Hank Eisses and Victor Vazquez had served their time and paid for their crimes. They also had been law abiding citizens for years after being released from prison, but Michael Mullen thought that he knew more than the law and murdered the two men because of his thought of the law. Bernhard Goetz was not happy with all of the subway crime that was going on in the city of New York, and decided to take the law into his own hands by shooting 4 boys on the subway who asked for $5 and said it with a smirk. With Vigilante justice, we have no way to decide whose thoughts are right and whose thoughts are wrong. Some people who commit vigilante justice, may think they are doing the right thing, but that does not make it legal, or for that matter wrong in other people’s