Crime Vigilante Justice

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by lsutiga, Aug 19, 2014.

  1. lsutiga

    lsutiga TF Pubic Relations

    My kind of justice. A time ago I posted on there that in such instances as below, juries would be VERY sympathetic to scenarios of this nature. That comment was met with some surprising push from a couple of posters here- who won't be named. :)

    And THIS one actually raises questions for me as to the father not being exactly "in the safe mode" having his sons pushing a vehicle. Granted it was a rural road, still. I also wonder what time it was.

  2. LSUpride123

    LSUpride123 Boobies make everything A OK!!!

    Can't say id do anything different.
  3. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Vigilante justice is a contradiction in terms. It is a lame excuse for murder. We have laws in this country and when people take them into their own hands, it is no different than machete-wielding Hutus killing people in Uganda. They think they deserve "justice", too.

    Two wrongs does not make a right. And juries usually convict vigilantes.
    Winston1 likes this.
  4. shane0911

    shane0911 Veteran Member Staff Member

    If the prosecution doesn't have any more than that he walks.
  5. LSUpride123

    LSUpride123 Boobies make everything A OK!!!

    By that logic, the US has no right to wage war and kill people.
  6. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Did you realize that the rights of a citizen and the authority of a government are two very different things?

    Are you trying to suggest that individuals should have the right to just declare war on other people?

    This Barajas guy thinks he is defending his family from a guy who was drunk? What will his wife and daughter do if he goes to prison for life? How selfish of him. It was nothing but revenge. Now he will go to prison with Banda, the drunk. He will have no family and his family will have no provider.

    And the usual suspects all want to be like that guy . . .
    Winston1 likes this.
  7. uscvball

    uscvball Veteran Member

    I think this is the fallout that most vigilantes don't consider. On one hand I can understand the anger and there have been some cases where I felt like the greater good had been done. OTOH, the consequences don't end with the death of the perpetrator. It reminds me of the case of Ellie Nesler. She was the CA mom who shot and killed her son's molester so her son wouldn't have to testify in open court and because she was afraid he would beat the charges. The guy was total scum, had a prior molestation conviction but got probation from the judge when several of his "Christian" friends wrote support letters to the judge. He ended up molesting 5 kids at a Christian camp including Nesler's son. For most people the story ended with his death and Nesler's conviction.

    She did get out of prison after 3 years but her life and her son's life were made ostensibly worse by her actions. Nesler died from breast cancer but her son Willie is currently serving 25 years for murder. At least a big part of his problems were being raised by an aunt because his mom was in jail (repeatedly).
  8. LSUpride123

    LSUpride123 Boobies make everything A OK!!!

    Nope, but to suggest this guy is the same as the scum elsewhere is just wrong and you know it. What he did was wrong by law, but he did society a favor IMO. There are far to many cases of a drunk driver killing people and getting to walk. Like I said earlier, I don't blame the guy.

    People go to jail for weed longer than some of these drunk driving/death cases.

    Its stupid.

    I don't think he thought he was defending at all. I think he knew full well revenge was the ONLY factor. Yet, our system is such that his defense is a very real case to have. Even more of a reason to show our justice system is screwed.

    Who wants to be like him? What are you talking about? Who would want to watch as their kids get ran over by a drunk?
    shane0911 likes this.
  9. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    I know nothing of the kind. He is worse than the drunk driver. The drunk had no intention of killing. He was irresponsible and must pay for that but he is entitled to have his say in court. Barajas committed intentional murder. Not pre-meditated and cold-blooded, but murder any way you measure it. Banda's family should have the right to murder Barajas now, right?

    This disregard for the law is appalling. Society does no benefit if everybody takes the law into their own hands.

    Yes it is. But it is not a justification for murder.

    I have no idea what you are trying to say. He was bent on vengeance and killed a drunken fool who was bound for a negligent homicide conviction. And the justice system is screwed? You are advocating that victims should have a right to vengeance without trial. Maybe the Islamic State is the place for you.

    You and tiga and those who think this guy is some kind of hero and a victim of the friggin' justice system. Those who say what he did was "understandable" and "would do the same thing myself".
  10. Bengal B

    Bengal B Founding Member

    While I might applaud an act of vigilante justice in a case where there is a willful killing or molestation on the part of the perpetrator, I don't know if Banda was an habitual drunk driver or just a guy who had one too many with tragic results. While I can understand how Barajas must have felt Banda was a criminal only in the sense that its against the law to drive under the influence of alcohol. I doubt that he purposely set out to do any harm to anyone.

    How many of us can say we never drove even once after having one or two too many? There was a time in my younger days when if it was after midnight and I was behind the wheel I was breaking the law. Thank God I never caused a tragic accident.

Share This Page