6 ms·

Precisely correct. People have a natural right to receive justice, so IF the government abdicates its assumed responsibility to provide justice people have eve

Precisely correct. People have a natural right to receive justice, so IF the government abdicates its assumed responsibility to provide justice people have every moral and ethical right to enact justice themselves.

spacebacon 2y ago
People with every moral and ethical right to enact justice are the types that can acquire clearance and join various authorities in the pursuit. Vigilante’s don’t abide by the laws so aren’t well positioned to dispense justice in a non hypocritical way. Maybe carve out a low level clearance that gives grey hat types a little room for counter red team activity.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  People have a duty to defer the enactment of justice to the government only if there exists a government which fulfills their end of the deal. If no such government exists, then people are ethically and morally free to do it themselves.
  - spacebacon 2y ago
    Who says no such government exist?
    - lupusreal 2y ago
      A government which is effective at prosecuting phone scammers? That government doesn't exist in America. Victims who turn to vigilantism are therefore justified and the negative consequences of this are the responsibility of the government which is neglecting their duty to victims.
      - spacebacon 2y ago
        As much as I want to agree with you and become a beekeeper I still see holes in reasoning. Governments have prosecuted a number of sim swappers and sms scammers. They are not effective at doing this at volume in my opinion but that can be argued.
jimbokun 2y ago
Because the real world is a Batman comic book.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  I never read any comic book, sorry.. In absence of a government willing or able to enforce laws, vigilantism creates a public pressure to fix the government. Either way though, people are entitled to justice. If the government doesn't provide it, then the government is responsible for the harmful consequence of the resulting vigilantism.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    That's just your opinion. In reality that's not actually how it works, and what you describe is a worse world for everyone.
    - lupusreal 2y ago
      What reality of ethics and morality do you appeal to, that isn't just another opinion?
kelnos 2y ago
> People have a natural right to receive justice There's no such thing as a "natural right". Rights are granted, not innate. In the US we might think freedom of speech is a "natural right", but go to a country that doesn't have that, and you'll see how "natural" it really is. (And hell, even in the US, free speech rights are curtailed all the time.) > IF the government abdicates its assumed responsibility to provide justice people have every moral and ethical right to enact justice themselves. I don't agree with that. Look at how (for example) the 1800s in the US west looked when it came to so-called "justice", when the government wouldn't or couldn't prevent or track all that much crime. That's not a world I want to experience.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  Other countries violating rights doesn't mean those rights don't exist. I speak of natural rights and not legal rights for this reason. And not that I have not denied the negative consequences of vigilantism for society as a whole. Those consequences are the reason governments are supposed to seek justice in a more orderly and accountable manner. It is when governments renege on that responsibility that they bare the blame for the consequences, as people seek justice on their own (because they know justice is their right and will seek it themselves if nobody else will for them. This innate understanding of being entitled to justice is the proof that a natural right to justice does exist.)

spacebacon 2y ago

People with every moral and ethical right to enact justice are the types that can acquire clearance and join various authorities in the pursuit. Vigilante’s don’t abide by the laws so aren’t well positioned to dispense justice in a non hypocritical way. Maybe carve out a low level clearance that gives grey hat types a little room for counter red team activity.

lupusreal 2y ago
People have a duty to defer the enactment of justice to the government only if there exists a government which fulfills their end of the deal. If no such government exists, then people are ethically and morally free to do it themselves.
- spacebacon 2y ago
  Who says no such government exist?
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    A government which is effective at prosecuting phone scammers? That government doesn't exist in America. Victims who turn to vigilantism are therefore justified and the negative consequences of this are the responsibility of the government which is neglecting their duty to victims.
    - spacebacon 2y ago
      As much as I want to agree with you and become a beekeeper I still see holes in reasoning. Governments have prosecuted a number of sim swappers and sms scammers. They are not effective at doing this at volume in my opinion but that can be argued.

jimbokun 2y ago

Because the real world is a Batman comic book.

lupusreal 2y ago
I never read any comic book, sorry.. In absence of a government willing or able to enforce laws, vigilantism creates a public pressure to fix the government. Either way though, people are entitled to justice. If the government doesn't provide it, then the government is responsible for the harmful consequence of the resulting vigilantism.
- kelnos 2y ago
  That's just your opinion. In reality that's not actually how it works, and what you describe is a worse world for everyone.
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    What reality of ethics and morality do you appeal to, that isn't just another opinion?

kelnos 2y ago

> People have a natural right to receive justice There's no such thing as a "natural right". Rights are granted, not innate. In the US we might think freedom of speech is a "natural right", but go to a country that doesn't have that, and you'll see how "natural" it really is. (And hell, even in the US, free speech rights are curtailed all the time.) > IF the government abdicates its assumed responsibility to provide justice people have every moral and ethical right to enact justice themselves. I don't agree with that. Look at how (for example) the 1800s in the US west looked when it came to so-called "justice", when the government wouldn't or couldn't prevent or track all that much crime. That's not a world I want to experience.

lupusreal 2y ago
Other countries violating rights doesn't mean those rights don't exist. I speak of natural rights and not legal rights for this reason. And not that I have not denied the negative consequences of vigilantism for society as a whole. Those consequences are the reason governments are supposed to seek justice in a more orderly and accountable manner. It is when governments renege on that responsibility that they bare the blame for the consequences, as people seek justice on their own (because they know justice is their right and will seek it themselves if nobody else will for them. This innate understanding of being entitled to justice is the proof that a natural right to justice does exist.)