Community Vigilantism against Paedophile

[Linker Niederrhein]

The collective sense of right and wrong, the collective sense of justice and injustice, is something that must be respected and considered by the so-called 'Legal System' and the bureaucratic mess it represents.

Individuals can make mistakes, but the people never do.

There is a reason vigilantism has been positively portrayed in popular media for a century. The reason being that it works.

[Call to power]

I think in my opinion, paedophiles should be sent to a reform institution where they are educated thoroughly not to do it again.

and we shall call this wondrous new place Prison

[Pritisakiah]

The collective sense of right and wrong, the collective sense of justice and injustice, is something that must be respected and considered by the so-called 'Legal System' and the bureaucratic mess it represents.

Individuals can make mistakes, but the people never do.

There is a reason vigilantism has been positively portrayed in popular media for a century. The reason being that it works.

Erm... no. The people never make mistakes? So that's why racism was institutionally and socially acceptable for centuries? Surely, if individuals can make mistakes, and society is composed of individuals, then society too can make mistakes? How can it be better than the sum of its parts? And I would question the idea that vigilantism has been 'positively portrayed in popular media'... what about Frankenstein, when the pitchfork-wielding mob is hounding the poor monster? No, I'm sorry, but people, communities, are too angry and irrational to be allowed to do whatever they want regardless of the law.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I think in my opinion, paedophiles should be sent to a reform institution where they are educated thoroughly not to do it again.

and we shall call this wondrous new place Prison

I know prisons: but there are also specialist institutions that actually help offenders reintegrate to society too. From my perspective, prisons are pure detention centres of security.

[Linker Niederrhein]

Erm... no. The people never make mistakes? So that's why racism was institutionally and socially acceptable for centuries?

What makes you think that racism is a mistake?

Surely, if individuals can make mistakes, and society is composed of individuals, then society too can make mistakes? How can it be better than the sum of its parts?

It's not the sum, but the product. Bronze is a good example.

And I would question the idea that vigilantism has been 'positively portrayed in popular media'... what about Frankenstein, when the pitchfork-wielding mob is hounding the poor monster? No, I'm sorry, but people, communities, are too angry and irrational to be allowed to do whatever they want regardless of the law.

They make the laws!

[Songri]

The collective sense of right and wrong, the collective sense of justice and injustice, is something that must be respected and considered by the so-called 'Legal System' and the bureaucratic mess it represents.

Individuals can make mistakes, but the people never do.

There is a reason vigilantism has been positively portrayed in popular media for a century. The reason being that it works.

A Mob is one of the most dangerous and irrational things possible. Because if your part of a mob it becomes very easy to do things you would never even think about normally as it isn't you, its just the group your in has the general view that this should occur, and since your part of a large faceless group people think they can't be held accountable for their actions.

Have you ever heard the quote that the IQ of a group is the IQ of the lowest member divided by the number of people present. Can't remember who said it but it is very true.

[Non Aligned States]

What makes you think that racism is a mistake?

Probably the part where racism says killing people, robbing their corpses, raping their women and taking their body parts as trophies is perfectly fine, so long as those people have a different skin color.

How would you like a neighbor who thought of you as subhuman and acted on it?

[Linker Niederrhein]

A Mob is one of the most dangerous and irrational things possible. Because if your part of a mob it becomes very easy to do things you would never even think about normally as it isn't you, its just the group your in has the general view that this should occur, and since your part of a large faceless group people think they can't be held accountable for their actions.

Have you ever heard the quote that the IQ of a group is the IQ of the lowest member divided by the number of people present. Can't remember who said it but it is very true.

'Mobs' as you call them (I prefer the term 'Communities' myself) have been responsible for pretty much every advance Man has made since the neolithic revolution, be it the development of agriculture, the establishment of urban settings, the Athenian and Roman democracies, the American and French revolution.

Certainly, not everything they've done has been unanimously lauded, but without them, we wouldn't be here.

[SaintB]

Erm... no. The people never make mistakes? So that's why racism was institutionally and socially acceptable for centuries?

What makes you think that racism is a mistake?

Irrational hatred of fellow humans based on superficial differences in the appearance and/or culture. How is that in any way constructive or useful?

Surely, if individuals can make mistakes, and society is composed of individuals, then society too can make mistakes? How can it be better than the sum of its parts?

It's not the sum, but the product. Bronze is a good example.

That is a very naive statement.

And I would question the idea that vigilantism has been 'positively portrayed in popular media'... what about Frankenstein, when the pitchfork-wielding mob is hounding the poor monster? No, I'm sorry, but people, communities, are too angry and irrational to be allowed to do whatever they want regardless of the law.

They make the laws!

Yes they do and some of the laws they make are laws that appoint people to handle and dispense justice in a fair manner on people's behalf; thereby making it unlawful for the general public to take matters into their own hands.

[Linker Niederrhein]

What makes you think that racism is a mistake?

Probably the part where racism says killing people, robbing their corpses, raping their women and taking their body parts as trophies is perfectly fine, so long as those people have a different skin color.

How would you like a neighbor who thought of you as subhuman and acted on it?

It doesn't. Racism is, simply, stating that certain traits - be they good or bad ones - are unusually common in a given, physically or culturally distinct group. Nothing there about 'Killing' them or 'Raping' them.

Obviously, these traits can be used to infer advantages and disadvantages, from which we can tell how well one of these distinct groups will do in a given environment. I.e. blacks living at the equator enjoy a much smaller risk of suffering skin cancer, whereas white people living in temperate areas enjoy the advantage of free vitamin D production.

[Non Aligned States]

'Mobs' as you call them (I prefer the term 'Communities' myself) have been responsible for pretty much every advance Man has made since the neolithic revolution, be it the development of agriculture, the establishment of urban settings, the Athenian and Roman democracies, the American and French revolution.

Hmm... no. This is pretty much false. Scientific advances were commonly the contributions of individuals who had found the backing of influential and rich people. Mobs had nothing to do with it. Most past and current governments were also not created by mobs, but organized factions. Mobs are, as a rule, undisciplined, destructive, and inherently incapable of contributing positively to anything. I challenge you to prove otherwise.

It doesn't. Racism is, simply, stating that certain traits - be they good or bad ones - are unusually common in a given, physically or culturally distinct group. Nothing there about 'Killing' them or 'Raping' them.

Then you must have been ignoring the past couple hundred years of racism that said it was ok to commit any number of atrocities on people of different skin color. Racism that was acted on, frequently, and often in very bloody ways I might add. I think that you deny this pretty much tells us that what you're peddling is a load of cow dung.

[Messonia]

I also disagree with community vigalantism but only because these mobs tend to have a low standard of evidence and never adhere to a non-stagnating set of ethics. It always devolves into witch hunt hysteria.

My alternative solutions:

1) We need a Dexter, or someone like him.

2) The Boondock Saints.

3) All child molesters castrated and/or forced to take medication that supresses their urges. This is cost effective and more clinically effective than psychological rehabilitation, which is like trying to reform a rabid dog.

I have no sympathy for pedophiles. 5-10 years in prison does not make up for stealing a child's innocence and scarring them for eternity. If it was up to me I'd put them all out of their own as well as society's misery. They are a meaningless, malignant existence.

[Linker Niederrhein]

That is a very naive statement.

How so? Lets try it the other way around. How can a 'Mob' as some people choose to call it be more irrational than the average individual therein when said 'Mob' (Or crowd, to use Gustave Le Bon's term) is just the sum of its parts? Even if it's supposed to have negative effects, it must be more than a mere sum. Otherwise, the difference between the crowd and the individual would be zero.

Yes they do and some of the laws they make are laws that appoint people to handle and dispense justice in a fair manner on people's behalf; thereby making it unlawful for the general public to take matters into their own hands.

And they can nix these same laws, too.

[SaintB]

That is a very naive statement.

How so? Lets try it the other way around. How can a 'Mob' as some people choose to call it be more irrational than the average individual therein when said 'Mob' (Or crowd, to use Gustave Le Bon's term) is just the sum of its parts? Even if it's supposed to have negative effects, it must be more than a mere sum. Otherwise, the difference between the crowd and the individual would be zero.

You are mistaking a mob for a crowd or a community. A mob is by the accepted definition an angry and/or unruly group of people with only negative intentions such as murder, mayhem, or destruction. It has very little if any semblance of order and does what it pleases, its an ugly side of human nature and in no way constructive or beneficial. As your much vaunted society says: Mobs are bad. It seems hypocritical of you to try and say you support everything society does and says and then say that there is nothing wrong with lawlessness.

[quote="SaintB]Yes they do and some of the laws they make are laws that appoint people to handle and dispense justice in a fair manner on people's behalf; thereby making it unlawful for the general public to take matters into their own hands.[/quote]And they can nix these same laws, too.[/quote]

No they can't. By nixing those laws as you put it they are undermining everything that they attempted to accomplish. Once again you are essentially contradicting yourself.

[Linker Niederrhein]

Hmm... no. This is pretty much false. Scientific advances were commonly the contributions of individuals who had found the backing of influential and rich people. Mobs had nothing to do with it. Most past and current governments were also not created by mobs, but organized factions. Mobs are, as a rule, undisciplined, destructive, and inherently incapable of contributing positively to anything. I challenge you to prove otherwise.

Why do you make a distinction between 'Mob' and 'Organised Faction'? I note that the OP used the term 'Community'. A group. A crowd. The defining element here is more than one individual.

That applies to your 'Organised Faction' as well. Thus supporting my point, and, not entirely coincidentally, refuting yours.

As for your individuals - they need to work in a context (A community). Without this context, they have no reason to be imaginative, no reason to be innovative. A lone hunter has no reason - nor the means - to domesticate crops. A community does.

Then you must have been ignoring the past couple hundred years of racism that said it was ok to commit any number of atrocities on people of different skin color. Racism that was acted on, frequently, and often in very bloody ways I might add. I think that you deny this pretty much tells us that what you're peddling is a load of cow dung.

Language, please. I expect a more intellectual approach than 'Cow Dung'. If you're getting heated because people disagree with you, I suggest a cold shower.

Anyway. Where did I deny that atrocities happened? I just said that racism isn't inherently about killing, robbing and raping, yet alone the cause of it. All of these things happen quite frequently among members of the same ethnic group, too.

Which leads us to the conclusion that racism cannot be the cause of it - or it'd not occur between members of the same ethnic group, a hypothesis easily rejected.

Thus, although racism can be used as an excuse for unethical behaviour, it isn't the cause of it, nor is it inherent to racism. Racism can be something as simple as 'He's black, I bet he's good at sports'.

[Linker Niederrhein]

You are mistaking a mob for a crowd or a community. A mob is by the accepted definition an angry and/or unruly group of people with only negative intentions such as murder, mayhem, or destruction. It has very little if any semblance of order and does what it pleases, its an ugly side of human nature and in no way constructive or beneficial. As your much vaunted society says: Mobs are bad. It seems hypocritical of you to try and say you support everything society does and says and then say that there is nothing wrong with lawlessness.

You weren't addressing my point at all. May I ask you to read it again, and maybe even succeed at understanding it?

To wit: "If a mob is, on average, more prone to irrational behaviour than the average individual therein, then the mob must be more than the sum of its parts. If it isn't, then it'd have to be exactly as irrational as the average individual therein."

If you wish to refute this statement, you do, incidentally, refute your own point that mobs are somehow worse than individuals.

Secondly, I must (Again) address your rather unscientific hypocrisy - you single out 'Mobs' as an example of what's bad with groups of people, holding up the individual, yet you're ignoring the vastly greater number of functioning social groups, which operate on exactly the same principles as your 'Mobs' - a group is, after all, a group -, yet clearly have positive effects. You're part of at least one of them (Quite possibly more than that), yet you're not cogniscant of it?

No they can't. By nixing those laws as you put it they are undermining everything that they attempted to accomplish. Once again you are essentially contradicting yourself.

How so? What has been given can be taken, especially if it has been proven not to work as intended. Wouldn't you give up on a concept when it turns out to be insufficient for the task at hand?

[Yootopia]

Individuals can make mistakes, but the people never do.

The People is just A Load Of Individuals, the same wuys who in fact are basically your "Bureaucratic Faceless Pussy Bastarts" lot, from 9 to 5.

There is a reason vigilantism has been positively portrayed in popular media for a century. The reason being that violence is sexy.

Fixed...

[Non Aligned States]

Why do you make a distinction between 'Mob' and 'Organised Faction'? I note that the OP used the term 'Community'. A group. A crowd. The defining element here is more than one individual.

Wrong. A mob is a disorganized group of individuals which may or may not have a leader, but does not have any hierarchy or lines of responsibility. An organized faction has clear lines of hierarchy, a clear leader, and a formalized control structure.

That applies to your 'Organised Faction' as well. Thus supporting my point, and, not entirely coincidentally, refuting yours.

You may try playing fast and loose with the English language with people less educated elsewhere, but on NSG, you don't get to redefine words to mean things they don't. You fail.

As for your individuals - they need to work in a context (A community). Without this context, they have no reason to be imaginative, no reason to be innovative. A lone hunter has no reason - nor the means - to domesticate crops. A community does.

Communities are not mobs as mobs are commonly defined. Furthermore, an individual does not need a community to be imaginative or innovative. This is a falsehood. Necessity is the prime factor towards innovation, not community.

Anyway. Where did I deny that atrocities happened? I just said that racism isn't inherently about killing, robbing and raping, yet alone the cause of it. All of these things happen quite frequently among members of the same ethnic group, too.

Racism is a pseudo social construct designed to make killing, robbing and raping more acceptable if it's done to another ethnic group. That you attempt to defend racism as is means you defend all the things it stands for too. You do not get to pick and choose which parts to cheer for.

Which leads us to the conclusion that racism cannot be the cause of it - or it'd not occur between members of the same ethnic group, a hypothesis easily rejected.

Another falsehood. You will not find any instance of average townspeople attacking another (who has not been accused of any crime) en-masse with those not directly attacking sitting by and cheering that did not have roots in racism.

[Greed and Death]

Ah the joys of people mixing vengence and revenge with justice.

I am in charge of running off sex offenders in my community militia organization.

[SaintB]

You are mistaking a mob for a crowd or a community. A mob is by the accepted definition an angry and/or unruly group of people with only negative intentions such as murder, mayhem, or destruction. It has very little if any semblance of order and does what it pleases, its an ugly side of human nature and in no way constructive or beneficial. As your much vaunted society says: Mobs are bad. It seems hypocritical of you to try and say you support everything society does and says and then say that there is nothing wrong with lawlessness.

You weren't addressing my point at all. May I ask you to read it again, and maybe even succeed at understanding it?

To wit: "If a mob is, on average, more prone to irrational behaviour than the average individual therein, then the mob must be more than the sum of its parts. If it isn't, then it'd have to be exactly as irrational as the average individual therein."

If you wish to refute this statement, you do, incidentally, refute your own point that mobs are somehow worse than individuals.

Secondly, I must (Again) address your rather unscientific hypocrisy - you single out 'Mobs' as an example of what's bad with groups of people, holding up the individual, yet you're ignoring the vastly greater number of functioning social groups, which operate on exactly the same principles as your 'Mobs' - a group is, after all, a group -, yet clearly have positive effects. You're part of at least one of them (Quite possibly more than that), yet you're not cogniscant of it?

No they can't. By nixing those laws as you put it they are undermining everything that they attempted to accomplish. Once again you are essentially contradicting yourself.

How so? What has been given can be taken, especially if it has been proven not to work as intended. Wouldn't you give up on a concept when it turns out to be insufficient for the task at hand?

You yourself espouse that people like metallic alloys are not the sum of their parts (that being any number of desirable and undesirable characteristics) but only the product of those characteristics found desirable. That said: By your own words anything that a society, community, crowd, what have you, is essentially perfect and so any laws, dictates, or decisions that are made are by their very nature near-perfect and should not need to ever be disregarded or amended. To argue that mob justice and vigilantism are good things when your much loved society says otherwise is contradictory to everything you said about your beleif in the infalibility of group thinking.
Thats what I am trying to point out to you.

[Cosmopoles]

Sex offender registries, as practiced across the US, are deeply flawed. Don't expect any sort of change to the ridiculous laws that exist though, because any lawmaker that attempts it will immediately be labelled the pro-sex offender candidate by their opponent.

[Kashindahar]

To me, this highlights the issues inherent in Megan's Law type initiatives, where communities are notified. It creates and perpetuates an outrage that causes the target to feel outcast and therefore more inclined to act on his urges.

I feel that it's worth noting that there was no "Megan's Law" situation here: the media were the ones who revealed his living arrangements.

On a different point, nobody here's yet classified Ferguson as a child molester instead of a paedophile, and it's a little telling. Not all paedophiles are child molesters; should we treat them in the same way?

If we should treat them all in the same way, does it not follow that if there is another a kind of people which is in its entirety a subset of a second population, should we treat the entirety of the second population in the same way as the first, because of the apparent likelyhood that those in the second population will become members of the first, in the same way that all paedophiles have the apparent likelyhood of becoming child molesters?

[Dolphin Girl]

Pedophiles should be tortured.

[Dododecapod]

Pedophiles should be tortured.

Okay, so long as I get to falsely accuse you first and see you get the punishment.

[EvilDarkMagicians]

They brought themselves to a criminals level.
Well...that's retarded.