Would You Make A Good VIGILANTE?

[Jenna]

Ok, so while this great in a sport application, in a true violent situation it's not so good. The idea isn't to make your opponent better, it's too totally make life altering changes in his body, and attitude.

Hey Nicholas Thank you firstly for posting your thoughts. I am not certain about the above. The reason I had thought of martial artists making a better or more effective vigilante is not because they know potentially how to destroy an opponent, but for the very opposite idea, that they know when they have achieved their fighting goal. We know, do we not, when our opponent is done? Sure we can continue on, and but our training, if it is deeply enough ingrained, compels us to back up, no? This is what I mean about having a more equitable take on vigilantism if that is not too much of a contradiction. If either us or a loved one is attacked and our perception is that justice has not been subsequently served, and we, for whatever reason, feel a need for recompense, are we not more likely to exact retaliation in a more equitable manner? I guess that can be too much of a generalisation and too much to swallow on a forum. And but that was my intention for the thread though I apologise that I have not directed traffic very well.

So imagine your ,"J-The Super Martial Artist Vigilante", and you hear about this crack house down the way. The cops have been in and out of that place several times, and no one ever gets busted. In this scenario we'll say that the cops are viewed as corrupt by the general populace. SO you decide to take matter into your own hands. You get dressed up into your coolest ninja outfit, with all the nifty little weapons...

I understand that in your scenario, the law enforcement are in some way corrupt, though fiction aside, this is not a necessary condition for the victim of a violent crime to feel inequitably treated under legal process. I wonder would disproportionately low custodial sentencing not be a more significant factor in the perception of unfairness by the victim? Nonetheless, your story is certainly entertaining and but I wonder is the moral lost in the flamboyance of the scenario? I think you and I have perhaps visualised the vigilante in different ways. While I am happy to accept the notion of the "Caution: Superhero Town-Cleansing in Progress" vigilante that you presented in your outline, I had been thinking more of the individual seeking retaliation on their own behalf or that of a loved one, against another individual: their attacker.

I take your points though that vigilantism is ill-advised. I have no argument to make against that. My point would simply be that vigilantism for an individual is a valid mindset that can follow from the perception of unjust legal process.

Thank you again for your post Nicholas. You have a talent for screenwriting I think and I am grateful to you for outlining your points of view, thank you
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I guess that was the kind of point I was thinking of with regard to a martial artist making a more effective vigilante: martial efficiency, restraint and respect as contradictory as those might initially appear in the realm of vigilantism.

Hello Jenna,

I quoted this because I think that this is what you were getting at in your original post.

Martial training is a definite help to anyone who may be in a position where fighting is a possibility. And for a vigilante, that is certainly a possibility.

I'm going to differentiate between having martial training and being a martial artist. A soldier has martial training, but is not considered a martial artist: he or she is a soldier. Likewise, a SWAT officer has martial training, but is not considered a martial artist: he or she is SWAT.

Jet Li is a martial artist in every sense of the word. He make movies (art) that are dependent upon his martial arts training, and what he does is much more artistic than combative. That is not to say that the man cannot defend himself, but his main objective is to do amazing things that are more art than combat. And he does that very, very well.

On a more common person level, the martial training that most martial artists have is either geared towards ring fighting, self improvement, a cultural experience, or a social fitness activity.

Let us be realistic: the martial arts world is fairly insular. People are trained in a very sanitary environment for scenarios that they may never experience by a trainer who may have never experienced such scenarios themselves. Which is why I said earlier that the average martial artist is barely qualified to defend themselves against a street tough.

Keep in mind that a martial artist has a large advantage over the average suburbanite in defending themselves, but that is about it. The average street tough is uninhibited by the restraints of the average person and probably fights in real fights more in his or her daily life than the average thirty year old has in their entire life. That includes martial arts hobbyists, which is really what most martial artists are.

Regarding inequities in the justice system, we could easily fill fifty pages of discussion on that and still barely scratch the surface. Suffice it to say that I am in agreement with you for the most part

My personal strategy is to follow the three commandments:

Thou shalt not go to stupid places.
Thou shalt not do stupid things.
Thou shalt not do associate thyself with people who do, for they art stupid.

Those simple rules have kept me safe, and I know of what I speak, for I used to break all three of those commandments on a regular basis. Yes, I have real world fighting experience as a result. Yes, I get to wear a tough guy badge. So what? Only makes it more obvious to me now how foolish I was at the time.

Now, I stay away from questionable places, think before I act and associate myself with upstanding people who have common sense. I can defend myself and I stay in my general places of strength. Any run ins with street toughs require them to come to me, into my world, and away from their own home court advantage.

A vigilante must do the same: give up his or her home court advantage, go into their world, and take on an enemy where they are strong and have the advantage.

Very, very, very few martial artist have anything even resembling the training to do this with even a small amount of effectiveness.

Daniel

 

[GBlues]

Hey Nicholas Thank you firstly for posting your thoughts. I am not certain about the above. The reason I had thought of martial artists making a better or more effective vigilante is not because they know potentially how to destroy an opponent, but for the very opposite idea, that they know when they have achieved their fighting goal. We know, do we not, when our opponent is done? Sure we can continue on, and but our training, if it is deeply enough ingrained, compels us to back up, no? This is what I mean about having a more equitable take on vigilantism if that is not too much of a contradiction. If either us or a loved one is attacked and our perception is that justice has not been subsequently served, and we, for whatever reason, feel a need for recompense, are we not more likely to exact retaliation in a more equitable manner? I guess that can be too much of a generalisation and too much to swallow on a forum. And but that was my intention for the thread though I apologise that I have not directed traffic very well.



I understand that in your scenario, the law enforcement are in some way corrupt, though fiction aside, this is not a necessary condition for the victim of a violent crime to feel inequitably treated under legal process. I wonder would disproportionately low custodial sentencing not be a more significant factor in the perception of unfairness by the victim? Nonetheless, your story is certainly entertaining and but I wonder is the moral lost in the flamboyance of the scenario? I think you and I have perhaps visualised the vigilante in different ways. While I am happy to accept the notion of the "Caution: Superhero Town-Cleansing in Progress" vigilante that you presented in your outline, I had been thinking more of the individual seeking retaliation on their own behalf or that of a loved one, against another individual: their attacker.

I take your points though that vigilantism is ill-advised. I have no argument to make against that. My point would simply be that vigilantism for an individual is a valid mindset that can follow from the perception of unjust legal process.

Thank you again for your post Nicholas. You have a talent for screenwriting I think and I am grateful to you for outlining your points of view, thank you
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

Your first paragraph about knowing when your opponent is done. Well to be honest with you, I will agree to an extent. On the other hand, you have to remember that in a true violent situation, there is no get in your stances, put your dukes up and have at it. They're going to attack you with no remorse to whether they kill you or not. Matter of fact that may be there very goal. If you knock him down and think your done, or back off to let him up, it's just more chances for him to attack you. The same with being a vigilante. Here's the deal, let's say somebody killed one of my family members. Somehow I he didn't get busted for it, or didn't get the sentence that he deserved ok. Now, as a "martial artist" I could decide that I'm gonna track this guy down, and have at it with him, and beat the hell out of him, until he's done, (not killing the guy), and get satisfaction out of that. On the other hand, what if he also is similarly trained, and gets the better of me, and he kills me, well, then there is no justice now is there. I merely get beaten terribly bad, or he kills me those are my options if I choose to use my martial arts skill to bring this man justice. Or, I can wait until he's coming out of his house one dark night, walk up behind him, stick a .45 to his head, and pull the trigger. Now, there is no chance of not getting justice. THe man is dead, I did to him, exactly what he did to my loved one, I murdered the guy. He has absolutely no chance of fighting back, or defending himself. This is my point. Really it's not about would a martial artist make a good vigilante, because no matter how you swing it, you have to become like the bad guy to be a vigilante. If you don't want to be a bad guy, then you can't be a vigilante. Now, if you happen to catch somebody in the act of say stabbing someone to death, and you feel confident enough to stop the guy, then by all means do it. However, in my mind that is not being a vigilante, that's called being a good citizen. I mean yeah my point is that it's ill advised but, by the same token, there absolutely could come a time in a persons life when they felt like they needed to take matters into there own hands. I'm trying to place myself in the shoes of someone that would, and the bottom line is, I wouldn't leave anything to chance if I was that vigilante person. You may be the greatest martial artist that ever walked the face of the planet, but there will always be doubts about how effective you are in a real life or death situation, and I think that is for me the crux of the situation here. It's not about how good, or great of a martial artist you are. It's about how mean and bad are you willing to get to get justice, as a vigilante.


While vigilantism, may be a valid mindset, and wanting it done to someone, may be a very comforting thought, to do it like many other things is a whole other matter. THe thing is it won't bring back your loved one, and it won't make you feel any better. It'll just make you something that your not, and that's either an attacker, or a murderer. The idea that because your a martial artist you'll no when to stop is a little bit fictional to my way of thinking. Your talking about being wronged in some fashion, it being done to the point of wanting to take matters into your own hands. WHile there are some instances where this WOULD be justifiable. In most cases the heat of the moment, is going to make you take things well past that, "He's finished, I can handcuff him and take him to the cops now," point. Emotions can be our friends, but they can also be our greatest enemies. When talking about doing vigilante justice, it has to be done cold, with no remorse, no emotion. OR you will end up just as bad as the other guy. That is what would seperate you from the criminal and the just. Because if you let anger, or grief get the better of you, you will kill. It won't matter how much martial arts that you study, raw emotion will take over, and you'll do what you can to kill the guy. The only place it will matter will be in the court room when the prosecutor says, " Well, he/she is a 10th degree black belt, they should have known when to stop." and guess what they would be right.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Some food for thought, I remember in the 1980's the case of Bernard Goetz, dubed the New York City Vigilante.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Goetz

I normally shy away from posting wikipedia links, but this is pretty accurate. Goetz is not a martial artist and used a pistol, but this gives a pretty thorough account of how the incident was perceived and how it was handled by the police.

Daniel

 

[Em MacIntosh]

Hello my friend and thank you for making such clear points. You say:



Can I ask you one question? What are you protecting by being reasonable in this case?

Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

It's not a matter of protecting anything, you've already failed to protect because extending your protection to all situations is impossible. The mind can run away with itself to justify almost ANY behavior if you're emotions are shaken up enough and while we all have the right to be angry or even to hate, nobody has the right to be cruel. Revenge, once accomplished, is seldom satisfying and leaves you alone with your emotions with no purpose left to direct them. Then you deal with the pain.

I think its dubious to assume under a clouded mind that you're doing the world a favor by removing scum but I must admit, sometimes I think it's the correct thing to do, I just don't trust an angry person's judgement as much as a mind in balance, especially in relation to things involving bias. Anger has a bias in favor of it.

 

[ronagle]

Only when the law is inadequate to address the situation should a person take matters into their own hands. Too often people confuse justice with revenge. As powerful people I think we have a duty to go one step further in ensuring the saftey of others.

I wouldn't go out and look for trouble, but I wouldn't walk away from a person in dire need.

The character I take my username from said this:

"With a sword in hand, at least the people within my sight can be protected." -Himura Kenshin from the manga Rurouni Kenshin

While I don't carry a sword in public I do believe that with my skill that I am working towards the people in my sight are safer than they would be if I were not there.

I'd hafta have someone shoot a big light in the sky with something like a bat on it.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

While I do not feel that I would personally be a very good vigilante, I do look good in tights and a cape.

Daniel

 

[JKD143]

I suppose I would do ok as a vigilante. I would want a partner though... at least a sidekick!

It's and interesting question though... how we understand justice vs. revenge/retribution.
I believe revenge is negative, and I don’t want any part of it. Justice is essential, but will be meted out to all one way or another, it doesn’t have to come from me. Whether we say it is God, Karma etc, Justice happens.
It takes a bigger person to forgive without the demand of retribution, and to allow justice to take its eventual course, even if it isn’t on our timeline.
At its most basic, a “vigilante” is defined as a person who takes the law into his own hands. This is troublesome as it is usually (by law) outside of the vigilante’s role/responsibility/ to do so. They are typical not responsible for dispensing justice or enforcing the law by profession in their society. Of course this relates to “man made” laws which change over time, change with political shifts, and change based on culture and custom. As a result, it is easy to see them as arbitrary and subjective.
I think the question becomes further complex when the vigilante is enforce law, not made by man, but perhaps what most can agree is an inherent right, like self preservation, or the preservation of others.
This is where I see a “grey area”. I have no interest in going after someone for revenge, or to be sure they “get what’s coming to them.” I believe we are best to let it go, and let God/karma etc dispense the justice. In an immediate situation where I need to protect myself or another, no question, regardless of the law.
My grey area, is a situation where, the motivation to go after someone isn’t revenge, but rather, that this person will, or is highly likely to hurt others in the future, as they have done in the past. The law has failed to stop them. This would be viewed as “vigilante” but not for the selfish motive of revenge, but for the desire to protect the inherent right of others (safety and preservation) that person will take from them. What about that situation?

 

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I wonder how many unsolved murders are not really "crimes" but bad people being done away with.?


Is the justice system really enough punishment for some crimes?
They dont execute child rapist and they should.

 

[Milt G.]

Hello,

YES.....

Thank you,
Milt G.

 

[Flea]

I don't believe in vigilantism. But if it were ever called for, this would be the case ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mel_Ignatow

It's so foul I'm not even going to paraphrase it here. If you read the story, keep some Rolaids handy. (And don't worry, there are no photos.)

A lot of people were disappointed when this guy died a routine accidental death at a ripe old age. Myself included.

 

[kaizasosei]

I don't think so. I wouldn't be satisfied with revenge in most instances. I would understand my enemies and their position in the grand scheme of things. My ultimate goal would be that they realize their wrongdoings. I do think i could easily lose my cool in a typical fight situation. Also, i may seek revenge and go vigilante if someone hurt my loved ones in a major way, but generally, i don't believe that violence solves much. Also, acting against the law is putting yourself at risk. Why go to jail or looney bin for something that isn't worth it. As jesus said, don't throw pearls to the pigs. Furthermore, as jesus said; love your enemy, so it would be better that you arrest them and restrain yourself from excessive violence. If anything, learn about karma and how it works, then just sit back and let it happen.


I do believe the subject of non-violence vs. martial ways to be extemely schizophrenic. Just the other day i really started to wonder about it all. What made me think of it was that i had to do a lot of wasp hunting. At present i am raising a baby crow and its food attracts lots of wasps. Now i would have little problem with say..something like 10 wasps. But when i saw that there were more than 30 hovering about, i decided to take action. Btw, bug hunting, bug combat is a really challenging thing. I have often fought to catch various wasps, bees, unidentifiables and even full sized hornets. I do this with chopsticks. Sometimes, i try to grab bees, but for the most part i use chopsticks or pencils or something like that without hurting the bug.

Ok, so i killed a whole bunch, in the last days i estimate around 50, not with chopsticks but with a roled up newspaper, some with bare hands. This got me thinking of the line from this one buddhist ritual 'issai shujo'- all living beings. There you make a vow to exercise mercy on all living beings. So i thought to myself how schizophrenic is that. On one side promising to be merciful to all beings, but then going ahead and killing so many bugs. Although poisoness bugs fall under the category of evil beings and ghosts an demons, i'm pretty sure that they are also living beings...for example, i care for a bird but kill the smaller flying invertebrates. Again kind of hypocracy, have to admit. Must conclude, i have no answer to this. I'm thinking everyone must make his own decisions when it comes to such matters.


ps: in addition to eliminating all those wasps, my monster of a venus fly trap also caught two all on its own, one catch i saw live the other i just heard the poor bastard buzzing and buzzing away. Nature is so beautiful and yet sometimes also quite cruel.


j

 

[FearlessFreep]

I tend to believe that people should take care of their own affairs without relying too much on official involvement unless really necessary so I do tend to believe in a bit of vigilantism.

I'm not afraid to take care of me and mine, I'm just afraid of getting sued or prosecuted for it these days

 

[kaizasosei]

I guess there's a bit of Charles Bronson in all of us!



j