She can deserve both compensation for suffering and punishment for taking her own action. This is premeditated and she didn’t need to be there, but his actions clearly contributed negatively to her mental state.
Why is vigilantism immoral but court systems, including corrupt ones, are not? Aren’t both simply a way to decide justice? What makes vigilantism inherently immoral compared to other justice systems?
If you want a society where premeditated extralegal violence is “good”, you can always go to Pakistan. That’s exactly what people who perform “honor killings” believe.
The developed world got rid of that when duels went out of fashion. The problem with killing someone to solve a problem is that it creates more problems. The person who died has friends, family, children, etc. who will not think your actions are justified. They will come for you and your family.
I mean, it would be nice if all these f****** were actually scared of their victims.
I can’t say that just allowing vigilante outright is the right answer, but we could certainly afford to let her go like they let him go. Would be a nice use of a presidential pardon if it applies.
The fuck!?!
Ummm yea this girl deserves a pay day for doing their job for them not punishment.
She can deserve both compensation for suffering and punishment for taking her own action. This is premeditated and she didn’t need to be there, but his actions clearly contributed negatively to her mental state.
Her morally good action was premeditated? Unthinkable!
Obviously you don’t have good morals. Vigilantism is immoral…
Why is vigilantism immoral but court systems, including corrupt ones, are not? Aren’t both simply a way to decide justice? What makes vigilantism inherently immoral compared to other justice systems?
This is a category error. It’s like saying “bananas are immoral.” Obviously that depends on what you’re doing with the bananas.
“Vigilantism” means breaking the law; since what is legal and what is moral are two completely separate questions, your comment makes no sense.
That is an insufficient definition of vigilantism.
There’s no aspect of the definition of vigilantism that has anything to do with morality. You can be as expansive as you like, but
If you want a society where premeditated extralegal violence is “good”, you can always go to Pakistan. That’s exactly what people who perform “honor killings” believe.
The developed world got rid of that when duels went out of fashion. The problem with killing someone to solve a problem is that it creates more problems. The person who died has friends, family, children, etc. who will not think your actions are justified. They will come for you and your family.
I mean, it would be nice if all these f****** were actually scared of their victims.
I can’t say that just allowing vigilante outright is the right answer, but we could certainly afford to let her go like they let him go. Would be a nice use of a presidential pardon if it applies.