"John David Galt" > wrote
> DYM wrote:
>> That would be vigilantism.
>
> It's not vigilantism when the VICTIM HIMSELF fights attackers, only
> when a third party does it.
Except that, at the time that the attackers were assaulted, they
had abandoned their attack. The attackees were justified in holding
the attackers for the police, but not in beating them. That's probably
the reason the PA and police are trying to figure out what to charge
the attackees with: motive/intent is not clear.
Floyd
|