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

Politics is the process by which groups of people make decisions, so the political authority could be a group of vigilantes enforcing the Law. Therefore the vigilantes would be enforcing the law and the law itself would NOT be illegitimate and subjective. An established member of a community can be one who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into their own hands. Vigilantes are not necessarily violent. Constant vigilance and preparedness are critical to the safety of society. Attorney General John Ashcroft made vigilance a policy when he urged citizens to report suspicious activity through "a National Neighborhood Watch Program," spurring the formation of dozens of new local watch groups. The Department of Homeland Security has made repeated pleas to citizens to help fight terrorism, pushing the pendulum back toward the era of citizen involvement. Secretary Tom Ridge created a Citizen Corps Program, which will convene local councils to inform citizens about their role in homeland security and crime prevention. "It is essential to communities across the country to involve all citizens at the state and local level in our national preparedness and prevention efforts," he said. I reject my opponent's value criterion. Government powers are just as likely to be abused as vigilante ones. This argument assumes, of course, that government law enforcement officers do not abuse their powers. The fact that hundreds of prisoners are released each year because of wrongful convictions puts the lie to that argument. This past year, the State of Illinois released 13 prisoners from death row after DNA testing confirmed their innocence. In other words, the State of Illinois was prepared to kill 13 innocent men and would have done so had not modern science. My value criterion better upholds our value of justice because the only way you can achieve justice is by taking the initiative to protect it yourself. My opponent's value criterion doesn't even tie in to his value or the resolved. I reject my opponent's Contention 1. What ensures that the government is not biased? What makes the government just? My definition of vigilantism and my observation are not two different descriptions of vigilantes, but one total description. The definition and observation describe different aspects of a vigilante. Government powers are just as likely to be abused as vigilante ones. This argument assumes, of course, that government law enforcement officers do not abuse their powers. The fact that hundreds of prisoners are released each year because of wrongful convictions puts the lie to that argument. This past year, the State of Illinois released 13 prisoners from death row after DNA testing confirmed their innocence. In other words, the State of Illinois was prepared to kill 13 innocent men and would have done so had not modern science There is nothing to guarantee that the law is just; the government can also be biased. Vigilantism does not lead to hate crimes. Vigilantism is distinct from mob justice because it is solely concerned with the maintenance of the law When individuals or groups identifying with the established order defend that order by resorting to means that violate these formal boundaries, they can be usefully classified as vigilantes. Your example couldn't even be used in this resolved because it has nothing to do with the government failing to enforce the law. Is the Big Sword Society unjust? An example of beneficial vigilantism is enough to prove the resolved. The fact is that those bandits were not killing people for stealing loaves of bread. The vigilantes were protecting their villages from cold-hearted criminals. There was no bias in prosecuting the criminals; they were protecting themselves. Your attack on my third contention has nothing to do with the Social Contract. As for your questions: 1. Upholding autonomy pursues justice because when the government fails to enforce the law, who's going to enforce the law? You are. If people don't take the initiative to protect themselves, the will never attain justice. 2. If you were to say that vigilantes punish criminals based on a skewed interpretation than you may as well say that the government is too. As I said earlier, the government is just as likely to be biased as a vigilante. Vote affirmative because my case better upholds the resolved than my opponent.