Vigilantism 09-15-2014

These should not be construed as my final thoughts on the subject, they are not. The fact is I
am in a state of perpetual re-assessment of ideas, thoughts and more recently situations
around the matter.
We, particularly Americans, more universally as a by-product of evolved Western thought,
assume certain rights. Some possibly inherent from ancient past, but in recent centuries
better articulated. As regards vigilantism, the right to secure ones person and property.
As civilization advanced, forms of police or law enforcement evolved. These being predicated
on the establishment of some generally recognized code of conduct, to which all were to be
held accountable too.
As the movement of populace spread (in the case of the United States), organized political and
legal forms followed, but slower than the pace set by peoples intent to build lives in otherwise
undeveloped areas. In such situations, the norms of what had been recognized as civilized
behavior, had no established legal upholder. Too often to uphold what would later become
the accepted norm, the law, persons were on their own to protect themselves, family and
properties. Informal rules of conduct became the law enforced by (mostly) well intentioned
persons relying on their own sense of right or wrong. (Errors incurred in this free-for-all are well
documented). Never the less, in the absence of reliable, legally established law and its
enforcers, to guard ones person, family and property, no other choice was an option than to do
it yourself.
In most of our civilized situations the option is to contact the police and other authorities.
Yet, there are situations when and where legal authorities cannot be immediately available. In
these situations the only option is to do it yourself.
There was a time not so long ago, I was integrally a part of civilized life. There was no thought
entertained about the need to provide for personal protection or safeguards. The system
being well established made this unnecessary. More recently, being forced by circumstances
into a much less secure situation, the necessity of securing myself has become a, once never
held, priority.
I do not own a gun, but I cannot say that has not been a consideration, I still ponder the
possible need. Considering, what I have experienced and witnessed on the streets, our
civilized world mind is not a universal mind set. For reasons too numerous to try and
elucidate here, a class of persons exist with no thought or consideration for any but
themselves. These take the liberty to assault others as it best suits their purpose, as they
perceive they can get away with it. Often, legal means can only come into play after the
fact. In these situation, ones only recourse is to do it yourself. I do not believe this excuses
one from the law, but deficiencies inherent in the system must recognize its own short
comings and make allowance for self-protective means and action, under the law.
Having said all that, here are some persons, either as a matter of their temperament or life
situation, who should not be afforded the liberty of owning a gun, or such as may be
equivalent. I think a homeless person though possibly right minded, would be a fool to have a
gun in their possession. They would be harassed by the law to no end. And I could not blame
the police. There is little doubt, except by those well-intentioned but not so intimately a part of
the homeless community, that the homeless community is not only extremely dangerous but
also very vulnerable, to each other and the abuse of the establishment. The well-intentioned
too often recognize the vulnerability but not the dangerous ones. Everyone does not deserve all
beneficence. There are conmen, thieves and murderers. There are some who can legally
obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon, yet their natural temperament may in fact be
equivalent (or next to) that of a thug or hit man. A means of recognizing this needs to be
implemented. There are some whose judgment with a gun I would simply not trust, for a
plethora of reasons.
Regarding recent events, over the last year or so, I dont even remember the names of those
involved. A white man shots an unarmed black teenager because he felt threatened. As in many
of the cases, we will never fully know the whole truth. A police officer in Ferguson, MO, shots a
big black man who according to the community of witnesses, was surrendering. Here again,
there are more issues involved which we will never have an accurate picture of what is the
truth. Two men are beheaded by a terrorist group claiming to try and establish an Islamic
state in the Middle East. Regardless of what we do know about ISIS or know of its uncivilized
brutality, we do not and never will know all of the facts surrounding the incidents. Regarding
the current bandwagon most of the country is jumping on, about spousal abuse and child
abuse, the one thing that is most obvious is that we, the American people, are not willing to
allow due process of the law to deal with the issues. It appears, and I think factually, that as
we become knowledgeable, to the extent we are fed news, we want to demand whoever or
whatever we think we can to carry out our (limited) judgments on whatever scapegoats we can
offer up. We have become the unwitting pawns of mass hysteria fueled by media giants only
concerned with ratings grown by so-called entertainment masquerading as news. This, usurping
our laws, is essentially mass vigilantism based on our fleeting misinformation or incomplete
information. This is in fact a cultural problem and I cannot claim to have an answer to it, other
than to recognize it exists.
The bottom line is there are situations where vigilantism may be justified, but law may be
preferable. There are situations where the legal system is corrupt, to what extent must be
determined. In those situations it is the collective responsibility of the people to establish the
law. That will take us beyond the limits of this current discussion. No matter what, we are not
the independent thinkers or gatherers of factual information we wish to think. At least mostly