Vigilantes: Lawless Justice Breakers

Vigilantism is the act of preventing, investigating, and punishing perceived crimes without legal authority. It is often driven by a desire for retribution against perceived injustices and a dissatisfaction with the performance of existing law enforcement agencies. While vigilantes do not necessarily break the law, their actions are illegal in most scenarios as they lack legal authority to enforce the law. Vigilantes are usually motivated by a sense of moral justice and the belief that they are bettering their communities. However, their actions can be dangerous and lead to unintended consequences, such as the use of unjust force, unlawful use of firearms, and even premeditated homicide. As such, vigilantes who break the law in the process of stopping a crime are liable to be prosecuted for their actions.

Unauthorised use of a firearm

The use of firearms by unauthorised persons is a serious offence and can lead to dangerous consequences. In the United States, there are strict laws and regulations surrounding the ownership, transfer, and use of firearms, and vigilantism often involves the unauthorised or unlawful use of firearms.

The unauthorised use of a firearm by a vigilante can take many forms and may include the following scenarios:

Illegal Possession and Transfer of Firearms

Vigilantes may illegally obtain and possess firearms without going through the proper legal channels, such as background checks and waiting periods. They may acquire firearms through illegal means, such as theft or purchasing from unlicensed dealers. Additionally, they may transfer firearms to other individuals who are prohibited from possessing them, such as convicted felons, minors, or individuals with mental health issues.

Carrying and Brandishing Firearms in Public

Vigilantes may carry firearms in public spaces without the proper permits or authorisations. They may brandish their weapons in an attempt to intimidate or threaten individuals they perceive as criminals or those who do not conform to their sense of justice. This can create a sense of fear and unrest in the community and lead to accidental shootings or injuries.

Use of Firearms for Intimidation or Violence

Vigilantes may use firearms as a means of intimidation or violence against individuals they deem as threats or criminals. They may threaten individuals with firearms, engage in armed confrontations, or even use their weapons to harm or kill others. Such actions are unlawful and can lead to serious criminal charges, including assault or murder.

Modification and Illegal Firearm Trade

Vigilantes may modify their firearms to increase their lethality or make them untraceable by law enforcement. This can include removing serial numbers, converting weapons to fully automatic, or creating homemade firearms, also known as "ghost guns." Additionally, they may engage in the illegal trade of firearms, selling or purchasing weapons without proper licensing or documentation.

Failure to Comply with Firearm Safety Regulations

Vigilantes may fail to adhere to firearm safety regulations, such as safe storage practices, proper training, and responsible handling. They may leave their firearms unsecured, accessible to minors or unauthorised individuals, or fail to report lost or stolen firearms.

It is important to note that while some vigilantes may have good intentions, their unauthorised use of firearms can lead to serious legal consequences. The law enforcement authorities are responsible for maintaining public safety and administering justice, and taking the law into one's own hands can undermine the established legal system.

Premeditated homicide

Vigilantism is the act of preventing, investigating, and punishing perceived offences and crimes without legal authority. While it is not technically illegal, many of the actions taken by vigilantes are. Vigilantes inflict punishments on people they believe have committed crimes, without giving the alleged criminal a trial.

In another case, a man who waited at an airport for his child's molester and shot him in the head served no jail time. This inconsistency in sentencing is due to the circumstances of each case, and whether the jury and judge are sympathetic to the vigilante's cause. In the case of Bachmeier, the public was divided, with some hailing her as a hero and others condemning her actions. Ultimately, the decision to prosecute a vigilante and the severity of the punishment depend on the specific facts of each case and the sentiments of the jury and judge.

Unjust force

Vigilantism is defined as the act of preventing, investigating, and punishing perceived offences and crimes without legal authority. It involves the use or threat of force and is often premeditated.

Vigilantes inflict punishments on those they believe to have committed crimes, but they do not see the need to give the accused a trial. This was seen during France's 1793 Reign of Terror, where nearly 42,000 people were executed without trial.

Vigilantes often believe they are bettering their communities by protecting those vulnerable to criminal exploitation. However, this is not always the case, as some vigilante efforts involve targeting the poor, minorities, and other disenfranchised groups.

Vigilantes sometimes claim they are simply conducting citizen's arrests, which are still valid today. However, this is not the case if they inflict punishment, as this would be considered vigilantism and murder.

Vigilantism can be considered morally justifiable under conditions of social and political breakdown, where legitimate authority disappears or is rendered impotent. In these cases, vigilantes could be seen as a substitute for legitimate authority, working to enforce safety and security.

However, vigilantism generally breaks laws that protect those the vigilantes confront, denying them the rights of due process and a fair trial. It can also lead to a state of lawlessness or chaos, with competing groups all claiming to enforce the law in a given area.

Lack of accountability

The core issue with vigilantism is the lack of accountability. When vigilantes take the law into their own hands, they are not subject to the same checks and balances as law enforcement officers. They act without legal authority and are driven by their own sense of right and wrong, which may not align with the law of the land. This lack of accountability can lead to serious consequences, including the violation of civil rights, the use of excessive force, and even unlawful killings.

Vigilantes often justify their actions by claiming that they are filling a void left by inadequate law enforcement. They believe that they are bettering their communities by protecting those vulnerable to criminal exploitation. However, this sense of vigilante justice can quickly devolve into lawlessness and chaos. Without proper training and oversight, vigilantes are highly likely to unintentionally or intentionally commit illegal acts themselves. For example, they may resort to physically assaulting a suspect, damaging their property, or using a weapon unlawfully.

The lack of accountability among vigilantes also extends to the punishment they inflict. Vigilantes do not see the need to provide a fair trial to those they deem guilty. This was evident during France's 1793 Reign of Terror, when nearly 42,000 people were executed without trial due to unrestrained vigilantism. Similarly, in the United States, lynching has been the most common form of vigilantism, with thousands of episodes during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, predominantly targeting African American men in the South.

Vigilantes often operate in groups, further exacerbating the lack of accountability. These groups can become powerful social movements, challenging established authorities and claiming to enforce the law themselves. This can lead to a breakdown of law and order, as competing groups fight for control, each believing they are acting in the name of justice.

In summary, the lack of accountability among vigilantes stems from their extralegal status and their motivation to seek retribution for perceived injustices. Their actions, though sometimes well-intentioned, can have dangerous consequences and often result in the violation of civil liberties and the breakdown of law and order.

Lynching

In the United States, lynching was used to spread fear among the Black community and maintain white supremacy in the economic, social, and political spheres. It gained momentum during Reconstruction, when viable Black towns began to spring up across the South, and African Americans started to make political and economic inroads. Many whites, especially landowners, felt threatened by this rise in Black prominence and influence. The idea that Black men were sexual predators who wanted integration to be with white women became prevalent.

Although rape is often cited as a rationale for lynching, statistics show that only about one-fourth of lynchings from 1880 to 1930 were prompted by an accusation of rape. In fact, most victims of lynching were political activists, labour organisers, or Black men and women who violated white expectations of deference and were deemed "uppity" or "insolent".

Frequently asked questions