So was Nazi Germany. QED.
Your problem is that you're making the all-too-common mistake of believing it's a choice between pro-law or no-law. In general, if you're considering both sides of an argument, you're not considering enough sides. This messy world we live in is full of many delightful "sort ofs," "some of the times," and "yes buts."My position on vigilantism is a "yes but." I believe no law will ever be right all the time, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have them. We as individuals should strive to do the right thing, no matter what the law says. We as a society should make the best laws we can and enforce them as strictly as we can, because nothing is more evil than anarchy.
So in Daisy's case, I think the right course of action for all involved would be as follows: 1) Daisy shoots the pedophile; 2) Daisy tries to get away with it, but only uses methods that will not injure or kill others; 3) if she's caught, she's prosecuted in strict accordance with the law, albeit with as much leniency as is legal.
| karlmeszaros wrote: |
| I don't think child molesters do too well in prison. |
They absolutely don't, and I despise the fact that we as a society think that's okay.We deliberately and with full knowledge imprison people in an environment where there is no reasonable expectation of humane treatment. We're all guilty of a million counts of conspiracy to commit rape, but we lack the moral courage to admit it to ourselves.
P.S. -- Have I confused you with my simultaneous "go Daisy go" stance and advocacy of prison rights? Well, if you're wondering if I favor Amnesty International's "hug-a-criminal" approach or the "make-em-suffer" hard-line, the answer is obviously no. 