Would you take the law into your own hands ?

[El Greco]

Let's assume that someone has murdered in cold blood the person you love most in the world. Let's also assume that he has managed to escape conviction because of a legal loophole. Furthermore, he has showed no signs of remorse for what he did. The question is whether you'd consider taking the law into your own hands in order to "restore justice". An "appropriate punishment" wouldn't necessarily be to commit or organize another murder, it could be to illegally inflict any kind of damage to him.

[Boo]

Come after my children and their is no place safe enough to hide.



Boo

[wahrheit]

Come after my children and their is no place safe enough to hide.



Boo

Let's assume it was not your kids under attack, but someone would dare to criticize the grammar in your previous post. How far would you go in such a case? Asking purely hypothetical, of course.

:duck:

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Where is the Planet X option?

[gumboot]

Let's assume that someone has murdered in cold blood the person you love most in the world. Let's also assume that he has managed to escape conviction because of a legal loophole. Furthermore, he has showed no signs of remorse for what he did. The question is whether you'd consider taking the law into your own hands in order to "restore justice". An "appropriate punishment" wouldn't necessarily be to commit or organize another murder, it could be to illegally inflict any kind of damage to him.


I honestly don't know. I think this is definitely one of those "you don't know until you have been there" scenarios. And I dearly hope I am never there.

I find myself trying to move beyond the hypothetical. How am I sure this person is guilty, and not someone else, for example?

[Wolfman]

Let's assume that someone has murdered in cold blood the person you love most in the world. Let's also assume that he has managed to escape conviction because of a legal loophole. Furthermore, he has showed no signs of remorse for what he did. The question is whether you'd consider taking the law into your own hands in order to "restore justice". An "appropriate punishment" wouldn't necessarily be to commit or organize another murder, it could be to illegally inflict any kind of damage to him.
My answer to that would be contingent on how many others that I love could be affected. I'm assuming here that there's at least a chance that you would be caught.

Consider if I was essentially by myself -- I have no kids, no wife, etc. If I'm caught and imprisoned (or killed), there will be no really serious ramifications for anybody except me. In such a situation...yeah, I could see myself possibly doing it.

On the other hand, let's say my wife was killed, but I had several kids...then no, I would not do so, because no matter how much I may want revenge/justice, the fact remains that I have higher responsibility/obligation to protect my children from the further pain and suffering they'd face at losing their father, after already having lost their mother.

[Mobyseven]

I have been a similar situation to this, with one exception being that I don't know who committed the act (and the act was not murder). I would, and have, definitely consider 'taking the law into my own hands' somehow. The best revenge, however, is legal revenge.

[baron]

Is it me or is the poll lacking a "yes" option?

I think everyone would consider it, given the correct scenario.

I certainly would, if I thought the situation required it. I don't see the law as something that should be slavishly obeyed.

[geni]

Absolutely. Criminal courts are one thing but lets see them escape the civil courts.

[El Greco]

I find myself trying to move beyond the hypothetical. How am I sure this person is guilty, and not someone else, for example?

You witnessed the crime, you know the person etc. Pick anything, but you are sure beyond doubt.

Is it me or is the poll lacking a "yes" option?

I think everyone would consider it, given the correct scenario.

Apparently not everyone would consider it. And even among those who did, I believe very few would actually act. Hence the "I'd consider it" option. It suggests intent, and that's what I'm interested in.

[wahrheit]

And even among those who did, I believe very few would actually act. Hence the "I'd consider it" option. It suggests intent, and that's what I'm interested in.

Yep - I'd definitely consider it, but I am also pretty sure that I would not really do it.

[Sickly Crypsis]

I'd love to think that I could some how rise above the elemental 'eye for an eye' methodology for correcting an injustice against me, I'd love to think that I could trust and appeal to the cold, methodical, system we built to judge, weigh and administer punishment upon and from our peers, freed from the burden of subjective emotions.

But having the brightest center of your world extinguished and gaining no base satisfaction from that system I could easily lash out and claw for validation. In that courtroom I could, but I don't think after weeks or as short as days of mourning and reevaluating what has happened and where I want to go with it, that I could go administer the punishment personally.

The validation you want to get from punishing someone is to disrupt or alter their life as much, or in proportion to the way in which they have altered yours. Someone beats you up, you want them to either get beaten up themselves or be in gaol for as long as it took you to heal (and maybe with interest).

What punishment would change his life enough for you to feel that a balance has been reached?

His world is made of violent thoughts and actions, beating him up would be another day at the office. Ending his life wouldn't bring anyone back and would just be loosing a part of your humanity that made you the exception to him and his kind. And gaol time would give you the satisfaction that he was locked up with the other animals and keeping him from putting anyone else through what you have been through, but if it was in cold blood, I doubt that the rest of his life to think about it would change his mind about what he did.

I just don't think ultimately I would get any justice, because I'd never feel any better about what happened. Hopefully, none of us will have to find out.

Sorry If some of this doesn't make sense, I've had very little sleep and I'm basically typing on autopilot. :D

[Solus]

I'm too afraid of jail. Maybe if I get married someday, and I came home to find my whole family brutally sexually assaulted, and murdered. In such an extreme case, I might lose it, and seek vengeance. I would think in such an extreme case though it might be possible to use the insanity defense and maybe get a lighter sentence?

[baron]

Apparently not everyone would consider it.

According to the poll, that's true. However, I don't believe it. If a man sees his wife killed before his eyes and the killer is walking away I cannot imagine anybody would opt to let him continue walking and phone the police in preference to, at the very least, knocking the killer out with a well-aimed punch.

[ServiceSoon]

Did somebody just watch "The Brave One?"

[El Greco]

Did somebody just watch "The Brave One?"

No, it was Death Sentence (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0804461/). Or Hard to kill (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099739/). :D I'm sure there must be many more.

[scratchy]

I voted the dont know alternative, because, well, i dont know. I tend to believe i would seriously consider it, but probably wouldnt do it.

How many cases of such vigilante justice is there anyway? I have a feeling they are extremely rare.

[Tricky]

The answer to this question, like the answer to almost every question in the world is, "it depends on the situation". I confess to having taken the law into my hands in a few minor occasions (like if someone is tailgating me, I've been known to adjust my speed to drive side by side with another vehicle so that the jerk is stuck behind one of us), but not for something as serious as murder.

[Trakar]

Let's assume that someone has murdered in cold blood the person you love most in the world. Let's also assume that he has managed to escape conviction because of a legal loophole. Furthermore, he has showed no signs of remorse for what he did. The question is whether you'd consider taking the law into your own hands in order to "restore justice". An "appropriate punishment" wouldn't necessarily be to commit or organize another murder, it could be to illegally inflict any kind of damage to him.

If I walked into a situation where a loved one was being killed, I easily could and would respond to the best of my well-trained, and even creatively imaginative, ability.

If, however, you are talking about a situation where it is long after the fact, and some sort of legal rendering has occurred that absolves the individual from culpability, then I'd have to say that, in general, no, I would not feel compelled to act against that individual, but much depends upon the given situation and circumstances.

[staunch]

The law of the jungle, Acting above the law, Revenge, a law unto yourself. All are dark deeds. We are prone to rational and critical thinking, this is the $64,0000 dollar question. I think anyone in certain conditions is more then capable of taking the law into their own hands. If you plan it, it makes the answer more difficult which means you have had ample time to think. If you are reacting to a situation it won't justify your actions. Taking the law into your own hands. May echo the concept of justice. To me a baseball bat works fine. So I voted yes to what extreme I don't know.

[Boo]

Let's assume it was not your kids under attack, but someone would dare to criticize the grammar in your previous post. How far would you go in such a case? Asking purely hypothetical, of course.

:duck:

I really shouldn't post before my morning coffee. :o


The sentiment stands, though.



Boo

[bigred]

Let's assume that someone has murdered in cold blood the person you love most in the world. Let's also assume that he has managed to escape conviction because of a legal loophole. Furthermore, he has showed no signs of remorse for what he did. The question is whether you'd consider taking the law into your own hands in order to "restore justice". An "appropriate punishment" wouldn't necessarily be to commit or organize another murder, it could be to illegally inflict any kind of damage to him.

Probably not, because knowing my luck I'd get caught. If I could somehow magically have a guarantee of not getting caught, that person would experience hell on Earth.

[sugarb]

I guess the "right" answer would be no, if I'm a "law-abiding" citizen...but the truth is this: I know the rage I have felt at times when the person I love the most is hurt emotionally by someone else. There should have been a yes option, because if someone hurt him physically I seriously doubt I'd even take the time to "consider" the ramifications of revenge.

[fuelair]

Let's assume that someone has murdered in cold blood the person you love most in the world. Let's also assume that he has managed to escape conviction because of a legal loophole. Furthermore, he has showed no signs of remorse for what he did. The question is whether you'd consider taking the law into your own hands in order to "restore justice". An "appropriate punishment" wouldn't necessarily be to commit or organize another murder, it could be to illegally inflict any kind of damage to him.
You left out the correct choice. And if they ever found him/it, I doubt they would be able to identify the pieces. It would not matter if he showed remorse or not and his/it's death would be the end of an educational process - unless I was forced into a speedup. And my sphere this covers is a bit wider than you suggest but it certainly covers her.

[fuelair]

I honestly don't know. I think this is definitely one of those "you don't know until you have been there" scenarios. And I dearly hope I am never there.

I find myself trying to move beyond the hypothetical. How am I sure this person is guilty, and not someone else, for example?I'll ask them during the educational phase of the operation.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Killing them in retaliation would be rather pointless, IMO.

Killing their loved ones on the other hand :D .

To quote Philosopher King Eric Cartman: "When a man has been wronged, he no longer cares about danger... You go through life being told there's justice, then you learn the only real justice...is the justice you take."

[Cainkane1]

Well O J Simpson got away with murder and the families of the slain took him to court and won. This happens much more often than youd imagine.

I personally know of a woman who was murdered in cold blood by her jealous ex boyfriend and all he got was 8 years in prison. When he got out her father wanted to kill him but the rest of his family talked him out of it. I was on a Grand Jury that indicted a punk kid who for no reason shot a 20 year old married with a baby to death. He was 15 when he did it and he was given life with a chance for parole after 20 years. Its been 18 years and her family clims they are waiting for him to get out so they can kill him. We'll just have to wait and see.

[Gravy]

No, I would work towards finding other ways of obtaining a conviction. I'd have no desire to add to my misery by spending 20 years in jail.

[fuelair]

Killing them in retaliation would be rather pointless, IMO.

Killing their loved ones on the other hand :D .

."

Not funny. Not how it work's.

Though providing the person's loved ones with as much evidence as possible to drive them from it is not bad.

[fuelair]

Well O J Simpson got away with murder and the families of the slain took him to court and won. This happens much more often than youd imagine.

I personally know of a woman who was murdered in cold blood by her jealous ex boyfriend and all he got was 8 years in prison. When he got out her father wanted to kill him but the rest of his family talked him out of it. I was on a Grand Jury that indicted a punk kid who for no reason shot a 20 year old married with a baby to death. He was 15 when he did it and he was given life with a chance for parole after 20 years. Its been 18 years and her family clims they are waiting for him to get out so they can kill him. We'll just have to wait and see.A good support group trading executions might be nice. Though I prefer the personal touches that only self involvement allows.

[godofpie]

Well O J Simpson got away with murder and the families of the slain took him to court and won. This happens much more often than youd imagine.

I personally know of a woman who was murdered in cold blood by her jealous ex boyfriend and all he got was 8 years in prison. When he got out her father wanted to kill him but the rest of his family talked him out of it. I was on a Grand Jury that indicted a punk kid who for no reason shot a 20 year old married with a baby to death. He was 15 when he did it and he was given life with a chance for parole after 20 years. Its been 18 years and her family clims they are waiting for him to get out so they can kill him. We'll just have to wait and see.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hayes_(spree_killer)
This guy killed several people about a mile from me. He beat the charge on an insanity defense and has been in a mental hospital ever since. His last parole review was last year. All of the psychiatrists that evaluated him said he was no longer a threat but the judge still did not release him. It is widely known in our community that if he is ever released he will probably not live very long. Does he deserve to die? Its not for me to say. But being the victim of multiple violent crimes I can empathize with the family members of the slain and I am not sure that I would not do the same thing in their shoes.

[godofpie]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hayes_%28spree_killer%29

Sorry, that was a bad link.

[Piggy]

No way.

No sense screwing up my life, too.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Not funny.

Prude :p .

If I was really dedicated to deliver satisfactory revenge, then that would work perfectly.

But then, I am not so selfish.

[bokonon]

Killing them in retaliation would be rather pointless, IMO.

Killing their loved ones on the other hand :D .
That's just making the innocent suffer for the actions of the guilty. And what makes you think a sociopath loves anybody just because he's related to them?

On the other hand, I can think of several ways to drastically diminish his quality of life without killing him.

[rjh01]

If he killed one person and got away with it he might kill again and this time get caught. That is what I would want. Of course I would not help him in his crime. If I could do something that would get him caught then I would.

[fuelair]

If he killed one person and got away with it he might kill again and this time get caught. That is what I would want. Of course I would not help him in his crime. If I could do something that would get him caught then I would.
Then a second person dies for no reason.

[gc051360]

Let's assume that someone has murdered in cold blood the person you love most in the world. Let's also assume that he has managed to escape conviction because of a legal loophole. Furthermore, he has showed no signs of remorse for what he did. The question is whether you'd consider taking the law into your own hands in order to "restore justice". An "appropriate punishment" wouldn't necessarily be to commit or organize another murder, it could be to illegally inflict any kind of damage to him.

Of course I take the law into my own hands. The current system has failed, and I will offer my own solution.

It may mean me ending up in jail, but the person who was murdered deserves justice. It's not about me.

[Piggy]

It's not about me.

Of course it is. If you choose that path, it's all about you.

[nzric]

The best revenge, however, is legal revenge.

I don't know about that. I could get pretty creative with a hammer and a pair of pliers if anyone messed with my family.

[fuelair]

Small butane torch, Leatherman, salt, Draino.

[epeos76]

Scaling down the intensity is revealing too. What if we are talking about redirecting a little social meaness? There's lots of stuff up with which I will not put, much of which is technically against the rules but effectively beyond formal rebuke.

Fortunately, I am the law (or at least an "officer of the court", which is similar but with office supplies and bad suits instead of fire arms and mirrored sun glasses).

[Soapy Sam]

"To restore justice"?

No.

[fishbob]

"To restore justice"?

No.

Nailed it.

I would consider taking some kind of action, but it would not be "the law into my own hands" and it would not be "to restore justice".

[Crazycowbob]

Would I take the law into my own hands? Probably. Would I kill them? Probably not, but I strongly suspect that person's likelyhood of committing suicide would increase dramatically. There are a lot of ways to turn someone's life into a living hell without ever laying a finger on them, or being convicted of anything more than a misdemeanor if you got caught...

Reveling in their misery and desolation seems far more satisfying than being the instrument of their quick and merciful death, but then again, I'm a sick and twisted individual. :D

[Darth Rotor]

I really shouldn't post before my morning coffee. :o

The sentiment stands, though.

Boo
I am with you, Boo.

DR

[El Greco]

There are a lot of ways to turn someone's life into a living hell without ever laying a finger on them, or being convicted of anything more than a misdemeanor if you got caught...

I'll be picturing you as Max Cady from now on :D

[Crazycowbob]

I'll be picturing you as Max Cady from now on :D

Hey, I'm not a sociopath, just a little sadistic :D

[The Atheist]

In casual conversation, most people will tell you, "if anyone messes with my kids, they die...", and I see the numbers in the poll bear that out - most people do at least consider vengeance.

Reality is that it hardly ever happens.

We have a current case where a Maori bloke saw his room-mate's five-year old girl being molested, then lured the offender to a lonely spot and killed him in cold blood, but that's extremely rare.

I can't think of a single case where an offender has been killed by the family of the victim/s. I'm sure it happens, but against the sheer number of murders, it's statistically nil.

Like Piggy said, a second's calm thought will say that all you'd do is ruin your own life - and when the target is a piece of ****, it seems a silly option to offer to take over his empty cell.

[SezMe]

I don't understand the difference between "I'd consider it" and "I'm not sure". Before I vote, El Greco, would you clarify how these two choices differ.

[El Greco]

"I'd consider it" means that at least I'd seriously think about taking some action and perhaps even plan it. You can say it's the same as "I'd do it"; I didn't use such strong words because it's easier said than done. "I'm not sure" is self-explaining.

[rjh01]

I agree with The Atheist. I have never heard of a victim or a relative of a victim killing the criminals. About the only exception are domestic violence cases.

After all if the criminal is known then he is likely to be prosecuted. If he is unknown then there is nothing anyone can do.

[SezMe]

"I'd consider it" means that at least I'd seriously think about taking some action and perhaps even plan it. You can say it's the same as "I'd do it"; I didn't use such strong words because it's easier said than done. "I'm not sure" is self-explaining.
Since I think there is a huge difference between "I'd consider it" and "I'd do it" I'll decline to vote but watch the thread with interest. :cool:

[Soapy Sam]

Unlikely though it may be- and let us hope it stays that way- posting on the internet a willingness to pursue a vendetta could rebound on someone.
If someone close to you is killed and the suspected killer then dies mysteriously, having it on public record that you would consider vigilante action might be unwise.

[cloudshipsrule]

I have never heard of a victim or a relative of a victim killing the criminals.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122101349.html

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/Police-failed-to-stop-couple39s.3808859.jp

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20051027/ai_n15809524

http://spikedhumor.com/articles/38182/Father_Of_Kidnapped_Son_Gets_Revenge.html

[nzric]

Atheist makes a good point. There are isolated cases, but blood feuds, vigilante justice and revenge killing are relatively rare in our society. On the other hand, most people would probably say the same thing for "if anyone messes with my kids..."

Our common view of history is that the opposite was the case, but when you think about it, there's a lot of reasons why it "should" be more prevalent now than any other time. Nowadays there are many more ways to ruin someone's life and more ways to get away with it and the threat of punishment is a lot less compared to the kind of torture/inprisonment you'd expect a few hundred years ago. Also, it's a lot harder in a normal democracy to create a catalyst for a race/gang/religious/clan/class war than in was in the past so the overall effects of your vigilante spree would be much less... if you wanted to do it.


Why don't most people now prove to have the a. stupidity and lack of respect for human life, or b. courage of their convictions (multichoice depending on your side of the fence) in reality?

Because nowadays we have a better standard of living hence further to "fall" if we were caught?
Because we are now more selfish so less likely to risk ourselves for others?
Because we are now better educated to look at the overall idea of consequence?
Because we are now all soft-hearted liberal pansies who see the good in everyone?
Because now we have a greater ingrained respect (fear) of authority?

[luchog]

I agree with The Atheist. I have never heard of a victim or a relative of a victim killing the criminals. About the only exception are domestic violence cases.
I know of one case personally, involving a friend and his ex-girlfriend and student (he was a martial arts instructor at the time), who was still a close friend to him. I can't say too much, because I know that there's at least one other person on the list who is familiar with my friend. Anyway, short story is her crackhead ex gets out of jail after serving time on a drug charge, starts stalking her, police won't do anything, he beats her to death. Police arrest him, but screw up procedure so he walks; and he even brags about it after he's released. My friend, who has never been the world's most stable person, decides he isn't going to let that stand. Doesn't kill the crackhead, but causes enough severe head injury to turn him into a vegetable for life. (Mind you, this is a guy who used to dress up rather flamboyantly, go out into some of the more homophobic neighborhoods, and troll for gay-bashing j*ck*sses as a form of entertainment. He also nearly got us kicked out of a restaurant by recounting, in graphic detail and a bit too loudly, a fairly gruesome martial arts accident he'd been involved in.)

I have another friend who, at one point, was seriously concerned about possible child sexual abuse by the ex-husband of a mutual friend. Fortunately, his fears proved to be unfounded, and the situation misinterpreted and exaggerated (the ex-husband is still a sociopath, and has earned himself many enemies, however); and I have no doubt that he would have killed the guy had it turned out to be true. I also have no doubt that he would have ended up in jail very shortly afterwards, because he isn't the brightest guy about keeping things like that low-key.

As for me, under the right circumstances, if all possible legal recourse had been tried and failed, and I considered the individual a sufficient and continuing threat, then I would definitely act to remove the threat permanently. I would not, however, stoop to the sort of torture and violent self-gratification that many others here appear to enjoy fantasizing about. I would not lower myself to that level of irrationality. I would simply treat the threat as one treats a rabid animal, and dispatch it as quickly and cleanly as possible. I'm not interested in indulging any revenge fantasies, or convoluted and idiosyncratic notions of "justice". I'm only interested in protecting myself and those I care about from a proven danger.

[rjh01]

I know of one case personally, involving a friend and his ex-girlfriend and student (he was a martial arts instructor at the time), who was still a close friend to him. I can't say too much, because I know that there's at least one other person on the list who is familiar with my friend. Anyway, short story is her crackhead ex gets out of jail after serving time on a drug charge, starts stalking her, police won't do anything, he beats her to death. Police arrest him, but screw up procedure so he walks; and he even brags about it after he's released. My friend, who has never been the world's most stable person, decides he isn't going to let that stand. Doesn't kill the crackhead, but causes enough severe head injury to turn him into a vegetable for life. (Mind you, this is a guy who used to dress up rather flamboyantly, go out into some of the more homophobic neighborhoods, and troll for gay-bashing j*ck*sses as a form of entertainment. He also nearly got us kicked out of a restaurant by recounting, in graphic detail and a bit too loudly, a fairly gruesome martial arts accident he'd been involved in.)

I have another friend who, at one point, was seriously concerned about possible child sexual abuse by the ex-husband of a mutual friend. Fortunately, his fears proved to be unfounded, and the situation misinterpreted and exaggerated (the ex-husband is still a sociopath, and has earned himself many enemies, however); and I have no doubt that he would have killed the guy had it turned out to be true. I also have no doubt that he would have ended up in jail very shortly afterwards, because he isn't the brightest guy about keeping things like that low-key.




I have highlighted two parts of your post. They indicate that these people have something seriously wrong with them. This may be why such behaviour is so rare. Most people are not like that. Others who have posted recently have expanded on this point (edit see post 55).

[cloudshipsrule]

I'll say this: If someone killed or molested my son, and I knew who did it, they would know who I was.

[uruk]

I would probably do it. But I'd try to make it look like an accident or leave no trace of the body.

[Cainkane1]

Let's assume that someone has murdered in cold blood the person you love most in the world. Let's also assume that he has managed to escape conviction because of a legal loophole. Furthermore, he has showed no signs of remorse for what he did. The question is whether you'd consider taking the law into your own hands in order to "restore justice". An "appropriate punishment" wouldn't necessarily be to commit or organize another murder, it could be to illegally inflict any kind of damage to him.

I know a punk named Randy Dobbs who in 1989 played hookey from school and then ordered a pizza. The delivery person was a 20 year old married girl with a 7 month old baby. She came to the door and the little **** shot her through the window. She was dead before she hit the floor of the porch. He was only 15 at the time so the grand jury had to decide whether to try him as a juvenile or as an adult. They chose adult.

Dobbs was eventually sentenced to two life terms plus 20 years with a chance for parole after 20 years. Hopefully he won't be released but I digress. The girls family vowed to kill him. They are a very rural backwoods sort of people who know how to handle their guns and if there ever was a situation where someone would be willing and able to kill this punk its these people. If you want to see this jerk you can go to Georgia inmate locators and look under the name Randy Dobbs. He has a tattoo of Satan on his neck.

[Piggy]

I can't think of a single case where an offender has been killed by the family of the victim/s. I'm sure it happens, but against the sheer number of murders, it's statistically nil.

I do recall one case of a child-killer extradited back for trial. As he was being walked thru the airport, they passed a fellow at a phone who turned and shot the fellow dead. Was the child's dad. I don't have any coverage at hand, tho -- it was several years back. Jury did not convict the father.

[bigred]

I do recall one case of a child-killer extradited back for trial. As he was being walked thru the airport, they passed a fellow at a phone who turned and shot the fellow dead. Was the child's dad. I don't have any coverage at hand, tho -- it was several years back. Jury did not convict the father.

I love it!

[JoeEllison]

Probably not... I have too much to lose.

On the other hand, I could wait a few years, make it less obvious... and, yet, I see that the amount of time I would have to wait would be about equal to the time that I would probably cool down. So, unless the right opportunity hit me at the exact right moment, I doubt I would do anything. I'm simply too methodical to go down for some worthless POS. If I knew I could get away with it, I'd do it in a heartbeat... I have no problem with eliminating someone who absolutely deserves it.

[luchog]

I have highlighted two parts of your post. They indicate that these people have something seriously wrong with them. This may be why such behaviour is so rare. Most people are not like that. Others who have posted recently have expanded on this point (edit see post 55).
Except that you mis-emphasized. The first case, the guy did have some stability issues; but wasn't substantially worse than a lot of people I know personally, or who post here. I've never actually seen him lose his temper. He just really enjoyed fighting, and had a bit of an exaggerated sense of "justice". And you have to admit, it would have been an egregious provocation for just about anyone.

As for the second, again you mis-emphasized. He's an extremely intelligent and thoughtful person; but has some overly simplistic ideas about the world, and in particular relationships and "justice". He also has a strong irrational dislike and distrust of police and the criminal justice system (although, his having grow up in one of the less pleasant parts of Detroit, it may not be all that irrational). But again, no worse than I've heard from many others, including here.

Actually, now that I think about it, it's kind of odd how many people I know or have at least conversed with, both IRL and online, have such a strong distrust of law enforcement, combined with substantial "Galahad" or "Knight in Shining Armour" syndromes.

[rjh01]

All I can say to that is that I am glad I do not live in the USA.

[bigred]

USA is far from perfect, but you could do far worse too.

[Crazycowbob]

All I can say to that is that I am glad I do not live in the USA.

It's funny, I seem to see this phrase often, yet given the sheer size and diversity of the country, I would imagine there are probably a few places here that are similar to where you live...