(Matthew Russotto) wrote in
:

> In article >,
> DYM > wrote:
>>
>>Yes, the kids acted in a criminal manner and should be punished for
>>that. When the occupants beat and chased the kids they crossed the
>>line and commited another crime. When you seek justice outside of the
>>law you are a vigilante. That is the very definition of the word.
>
> The difference is that vigilantism isn't a heat-of-the-moment thing,
> as this was. In any case, if the law actually provided justice, I'd
> be more upset about seeking justice outside it. But nowadays, the law
> doesn't give a **** about minor crimes against persons; there ain't no
> justice.
>
>>The occupants of the car are (at least as far as the facts reported
>>here) guilty of assult.
>
> Not necessarily, if they merely chased them (as the second article
> said).
>

Yeah, I posted before I saw that second article. It paints a very
different picture. Again, just going by what is printed there, I think
the car guys will not be charged. Won't know until the investigation is
complete. I'll go with what the police find.

Earlier, there was talk of one of the kids getting beaten. If that were
the case, that's where the line gets crossed.

Now, going back to the definition of vigilantism, I don't know if "heat
of the moment" really enteres into it. It is simply seeking justice
outside of the legal system.

Is it justice you want or revenge.

Of course, for some on this group, justice is death to all you go slow.

Doug