Resolved: Vigilantism is justified when the government has failed to enforce the law.

"Since the governments are in the pockets of businesses, who's going to control this most powerful institution? Business is more powerful than politics, and it's more powerful than religion. So it's going to have to be the vigilante consumer." -Anita Roddick Since I agree with Anita Roddick I must affirm the resolution; Resolved: Vigilantism is justified with the government has failed to enforce the law. For clarification on the resolution I would like to offer some definitions from key terms: Vigilantism: a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily (as when the process of law are viewed as inadequate) Justified: to judge, regard or treat as righteous and worthy of salvation Government: the act or process of governing. Failed: to be or become absent or inadequate Enforce: to carry out effectively Law: the control brought about by the existence or enforcements by such law. Observation 1) as stated in the resolution, the government is not upholding the law. Therefore, said vigilante is upholding and enforcing the law in a justified way. Observation 2) My second observation concerns the definition of ‘vigilantism.' Classic vigilantes, according to the American University Law Review: 1.are members of an organized committee 2.are established members of a community 3.proceed with definite goals, not with the intension of random violence 4.act as a last resort because of a failure of the established law system That being said my value for this debate is the value of Justice. Being that justice is the concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, fairness and equity. In order to achieve Justice in the resolution, it is only Just that vigilantism is acceptable in the case that the government fails to enforce the law. To elaborate Justice is a key feature of a well-based society because of the proper concerns of proper ordering in a society but more importantly the people that make up the society. For my criterion I will be using the concept of a "Well-ordered society" from John Rawls A Theory of Justice. A Well-ordered society as explained by John Rawls is designed to advance the good of its members and effectively regulated by a public conception of Justice. John Rawls understands Justice as a contribution to "ideal theory," working out "principles that categorize a well-ordered society under favorable circumstances." Since the government has failed to uphold the law it is not a legitimate, government. Being that the government isn't legitimate is it only Just that Vigilantism should take effect to the extent of serving Justice in a Justified way or mannerism. Contention 1: Social Contract The belief of S.C. is the understanding of how the government should protect its citizens. S.C. states that in exchange for a few rights the government has a moral obligation to protect its citizens and maintain social order. When the government has failed to enforce the law as stated in the resolution the Social Contract is then broken and not legitimate. The citizens than have the right to exert Justice. For example sexual abductors are escaping the register because of loop-holes, because abduction is not considered in law as a sex crime. Tony Delaney who is serving a 4- year sentence for trying to snatch a 13 year old girl will not be placed on the register when released from prison. The judge who sentenced Delaney had no power to put his name on the sexual offenders register. When the government allows criminals to escape jail, or anything else through loopholes and technicalities it can be seen as not enforcing the law. Contention 2) History of Vigilantism For my second contention I would like to bring up past acts of Vigilantism and explain why they were beneficial or contained a well-ordered society in a just way. My first example is the Big Sword Society. The Big Sword Society were a group of farmers that originated in southwestern Shandong after the second Sino-Japanese War, when the country side was in anarchy and rife with banditry. These vigilantes supposedly protected lives and property. They defended villages from against roaming bandits, warlords, tax collectors, and later communists and the Japanese. As we can clearly see justified vigilantism is justified when the government has failed to enforce the law.