man beats nude window peeper

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

I'm not advocating for vigilante justice. The creep was stopped from committing a crime by the father while the crime was in progress. Vigilante justice would be finding out the creep had done what he had done... marching over to his house... and proceeding to beat the hell out of him.

The father exercised his right to defend his home and daughter. We can argue about the exten to which he did, but let's be honest here: judging from afar we cannot get into the mindset of the father that was dealing with the situation that was forced upon him- he never asked to be placed into that situation; therefore, we need to afford him leniancy.

if it was within his rights to beat up the man - he wouldn't have been charged with anything ...

and i'm sorry but what you guys are advocating for is vigilante justice ... he could have apprehended the man and let the cops do their job ... what you guys are asking for is that he gets off from the beating he gave this guy ... because you guys feel it was justified ... that is vigilante justice ...

polaris_x wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

I'm not advocating for vigilante justice. The creep was stopped from committing a crime by the father while the crime was in progress. Vigilante justice would be finding out the creep had done what he had done... marching over to his house... and proceeding to beat the hell out of him.

The father exercised his right to defend his home and daughter. We can argue about the exten to which he did, but let's be honest here: judging from afar we cannot get into the mindset of the father that was dealing with the situation that was forced upon him- he never asked to be placed into that situation; therefore, we need to afford him leniancy.

if it was within his rights to beat up the man - he wouldn't have been charged with anything ...

and i'm sorry but what you guys are advocating for is vigilante justice ... he could have apprehended the man and let the cops do their job ... what you guys are asking for is that he gets off from the beating he gave this guy ... because you guys feel it was justified ... that is vigilante justice ...

Just simply apprehend the guy and wait for the authorites. Hmm. I wonder how that would look? In reality... the offender would have tried to run or fight after being confronted by the father. Either scenario warrants a beatdown until submissive.

What you are suggesting amounts to the man doing nothing- hardly reasonable. If the guy had walked outside his home and used a gun to stop the offence against his family... then we could talk. This guy came out of his home and in the fairest of manners put an end to the obscenity that his family was subjected to.

chadwick wrote:

what is wrong with being a vigilante? i like it as it is what i know.

because it opens up can of worms that maybe you would like to see ... i don't know ... but i don't want to live in a world where individuals can decide what is fair and what is just ... and exact their own kind of justice ...

i wish no parent to ever be in a situation that warrants removal of things.

...that being said, I know it will happen again, again, again, again.

because of the amount of times it will happen again...swift justice warrants the removal of things.


I hope dexter is based on real stories.

polaris_x wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Just simply apprehend the guy and wait for the authorites. Hmm. I wonder how that would look? In reality... the offender would have tried to run or fight after being confronted by the father. Either scenario warrants a beatdown until submissive.

What you are suggesting amounts to the man doing nothing- hardly reasonable. If the guy had walked outside his home and used a gun to stop the offence against his family... then we could talk. This guy came out of his home and in the fairest of manners put an end to the obscenity that his family was subjected to.

well ... we don't know that ... you can put all the what ifs you like ...

i can understand that you think violence is the answer to all that ails society ... i got that from the death penalty thread ... but it does not make it right ... and in fact, it is against the law ... and again - do you believe in law and the justice system or not? ... one can't simply be allowed to choose to accept it or not whenever it pleases them ...

and i'm really not sure how you can say what i suggest is doing nothing ... having the man arrested and having the justice system deal with him is not doing nothing ...

violence begets violence ... a society that deems that violence is the answer to problems will find itself amidst a lot of violence ... see wars, mass shootings, etc..

Geezuz, man.

i can understand that you think violence is the answer to all that ails society

Where does this come from? A massive generalization that, frankly, is disrespectful. I tell you what... how about I say you are out of your mind if you think the father in this instance should have done nothing except cross his fingers and hope for the police to take the pervert away?

You might be Ghandi, but for the average joe... the situation was something that demanded some form of action. Don't give human beings too much credit. For example, look at the 'peeping tom' that you feel so sorry for.

polaris_x wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Geezuz, man.

i can understand that you think violence is the answer to all that ails society

Where does this come from? A massive generalization that, frankly, is disrespectful. I tell you what... how about I say you are out of your mind if you think the father in this instance should have done nothing except cross his fingers and hope for the police to take the pervert away?

You might be Ghandi, but for the average joe... the situation was something that demanded some form of action. Don't give human beings too much credit. For example, look at the 'peeping tom' that you feel so sorry for.

it comes from you advocating the assault on this man as a justifiable action ... it also comes from your position in the death penalty thread ... perhaps all ails of society is a stretch and for that i retract it ... but nonetheless - you do believe violence to be an answer to at least some of society ails ...

and i was wondering when someone who project that i feel sorry for the peeping tom ... nothing i've written would suggest that ...

and AGAIN, for the umpteenth time - who are you or anyone for that matter to determine what laws should be upheld and what shouldn't ...

Let's get this on the record: I deplore violence. But I am not above responding to violence in the manner befitting of the offence. As much as I can admire a Tibetan monk for their non-violent ways... this only works on the small scale.

For the umpteenth time... so read carefully... I haven't determined what laws should or shouldn't be upheld. I have determined that a man was within his right to defend his family from a crime that was occurring under his watch. For the umpteenth time... we can debate if excessive force was used... but this man did not 'break the law' attempting to defend his family from a sick pervert at his own home nonetheless.

There is no 'what if' when I attempted to illustrate simply detaining the man until the police got there is highly improbable. A fight or flight would have ensued and in either scenario... again... I contend that a beatdown was in order. And it is here when I would reassert that the real debate should occur: Was too much force used?

I contend that it would be difficult for someone to simply look at the guy's face and pool of blood and say. "Yes." On the other side of the equation, there is a father who's protective instincts kicked in and likely overrode any rational thinking at the time of the altercation. The mindset the father adopted was no fault of his- he was forced to respond in some capacity and it is us, from our safe little homes and outside the situation, weighing in on what we think.