[QUOTE=Lankist;19692817]Uhh the people.
By reinforcing judicial systems.
Rather than murder.
[/QUOTE]
But that's not what seems to be happening now, is it?
[QUOTE=Nautsabes;19692929]But that's not what seems to be happening now, is it?[/QUOTE]
The only change a country can experience quicker than ten years is complete and utter collapse.
Mexico is getting there, but it takes a very long time to establish the necessary infrastructure to properly enforce crimes. If you try to go the other way about it you will destabilize the entire nation. I don't know about you but I don't think we need a new Somalia.
It's Kira!
No, I agree with you, but unfortunately you have those assholes that are there to ruin it all.
These vigilante's are probably a couple of drunk assholes who are pissed that someone decided to help themselves to a bit of food.
[QUOTE=Lankist;19692923]This is how the Ku Klux Klan got started.[/quote]
And? The KKK was just a thinly-veiled racist, anti-immigration, anti-women's rights, anti-etc., group that hid under the name of vigilantism, and you're taking it by that. They were bigots parading under the name. I can see where you're coming from with this. It doesn't mean that this man is synonymous with the KKK, however.
[QUOTE=Lankist;19692923]Yes the government can NEVER recoup. It will ALWAYS be weak and nobody should ever even TRY to enforce laws legitimately. No we should all be Batman and The Punisher and run around murdering innocent people on a whim, with no system of accountability or evidence and no method of appeal for wrongful punishment.
You are the dumbest person I've ever heard. Not only do you want these people to live in poverty, no that's not enough. They need to live in FEAR as well. They need to FEAR everyone on every street corner. Abiding by the law isn't enough, the vigilantes don't even abide by the law. They'd have to defend themselves against the vigilantes. They'd have to stockpile guns and go on an anti-vigilante vigilante raid.
Congratulations. You've just started a civil war, you tit. It'll be the Mexico Massacre. Nobody is to be trusted, shoot everyone who isn't your blood before they shoot you.[/QUOTE]
..What the hell, man? I never said I wanted them to continue living in poverty or fear. Stop shoving words into my mouth. You assume like there is never going to be a righteous vigilante who is trying to act out and make a better community around them. There is no law protecting anyone in Mexico. And besides, it's not that hard to see who the criminals are.
And you assume that everyone's going to start shooting each other because of contrived self-defense taken to the nth power?
a+++ will read again
Wealthy compared to people in mexico.
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;19692987]It's Kira![/QUOTE]
what the fuck is a kira
[editline]01:52AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Flitchaye;19693048]And? The KKK was just a thinly-veiled racist, anti-immigration, anti-women's rights, anti-etc., group that hid under the name of vigilantism, and you're taking it by that. They were bigots parading under the name. I can see where you're coming from with this. It doesn't mean that this man is synonymous with the KKK, however.
..What the hell, man? I never said I wanted them to continue living in poverty or fear. Stop shoving words into my mouth. You assume like there is never going to be a righteous vigilante who is trying to act out and make a better community around them. There is no law protecting anyone in Mexico. And besides, it's not that hard to see who the criminals are.
And you assume that everyone's going to start shooting each other because of contrived self-defense taken to the nth power?
a+++ will read again[/QUOTE]
wait, the KKK wasn't a vigilante group?
what?
[QUOTE=Flitchaye;19693048] Stop shoving words into my mouth. You assume like there is never going to be a righteous vigilante who is trying to act out and make a better community around them.[/QUOTE]
The lack of a right to a fair trial is just as bad for a community as crime.
Jesus Christ, Lankist, just rape my post then!
[QUOTE=Flitchaye;19693048]And? The KKK was just a thinly-veiled racist, anti-immigration, anti-women's rights, anti-etc., group that hid under the name of vigilantism, and you're taking it by that. They were bigots parading under the name. I can see where you're coming from with this. It doesn't mean that this man is synonymous with the KKK, however.[/quote]
Had you done any research on the subject you would realize that the vast majority of vigilante groups ARE thinly veiled racist, anti-immigration, anti-rights groups. Namely anti-right-to-life.
[quote]You assume like there is never going to be a righteous vigilante who is trying to act out and make a better community around them.[/QUOTE]
By murdering poor people.
[editline]07:56PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;19693143]The lack of a right to a fair trial is just as bad for a community as crime.[/QUOTE]
No, it IS a crime. It is a criminal violation of human rights. Vigilantes are dangerous criminals by any definition of the term. They are no better for a community than the other types of murderers, kidnappers, rapists and thieves.
We have a society raised by Batman that does not understand what justice is out in the real world.
[QUOTE=Lankist;19693162]Had you done any research on the subject you would realize that the vast majority of vigilante groups ARE thinly veiled racist, anti-immigration, anti-rights groups. Namely anti-right-to-life.
By murdering poor people.
[editline]07:56PM[/editline][/quote]
My apologies, then, but that doesn't change the stance that there are some vigilantes that try to do the right thing.
And it doesn't matter you're poor, middle-class, or rich, you know very well that you endanger your life on a day-to-day basis by trying to violate someone's right to their property. They have the right to defend what they own and cherish. I'm not going to let someone waltz into my house and steal the food in my refrigerator that I worked to get.
Granted, this is pretty extreme to go to the level of murdering, but they full-well knew the consequences of living on the edge.
[QUOTE=Flitchaye;19693253]My apologies, then, but that doesn't change the stance that there are some vigilantes that try to do the right thing.[/QUOTE]
Sometimes stalkers have good intentions when they harass and follow their particular obsession. That doesn't mean it's acceptable.
If they want to do the right thing they should do the right thing. Murder is not the right thing. It never is.
[QUOTE=Flitchaye;19693253]My apologies, then, but that doesn't change the stance that there are some vigilantes that try to do the right thing.
And it doesn't matter you're poor, middle-class, or rich, you know very well that you endanger your life on a day-to-day basis by trying to violate someone's right to their property. They have the right to defend what they own and cherish. I'm not going to let someone waltz into my house and steal the food in my refrigerator that I worked to get.
Granted, this is pretty extreme to go to the level of murdering, but they full-well knew the consequences of living on the edge.[/QUOTE]
It's one thing to defend your property, it's another to go out and murder those you see as potential vandals/thieves/kidnappers/etc.
[QUOTE=Nautsabes;19693395]It's one thing to defend your property, it's another to go out and murder those you see as potential vandals/thieves/kidnappers/etc.[/QUOTE]
Either way, it's pretty vague as to whether or not the vigilante in question does know his targets or not.
[QUOTE=Flitchaye;19693486]Either way, it's pretty vague as to whether or not the vigilante in question does know his targets or not.[/QUOTE]
does it matter?
[QUOTE=Lankist;19692515]Uhh Rorschach was a satirical character. He was written to embody everything that is WRONG with vigilantism.[/QUOTE]
No.
And at the people saying they were justified in killing those men, thieves don't deserve to die. Even if the vigilantes were correct and they were thieves, they still shouldn't die for stealing.
Mexico is a fucked up country, government is corrupt as fuck, Drug lords control and run the country, people are poor as fuck, pollution is on the rise and is leading to more health problems, infrastructure is in disarray, murders and kidnappings are a regular thing
But the food is still good.
[QUOTE=w1z v2;19693716]
But the food is still good.[/QUOTE]
if you want to die at 50 of a heart attack
[QUOTE=Oecleus;19693577]No.[/QUOTE]
Uhh, yes. Alan Moore has said time and time again that Rorschach was intended to be a realistic portrayal of the Batman archetype, a wildly paranoid, unjust and generally insane criminal.
[QUOTE=Lankist;19692515]Uhh Rorschach was a satirical character. He was written to embody everything that is WRONG with vigilantism.[/QUOTE]
Misaimed fandom at its best.
[QUOTE=Flitchaye;19693253]My apologies, then, but that doesn't change the stance that there are some vigilantes that try to do the right thing.
And it doesn't matter you're poor, middle-class, or rich, you know very well that you endanger your life on a day-to-day basis by trying to violate someone's right to their property. They have the right to defend what they own and cherish. I'm not going to let someone waltz into my house and steal the food in my refrigerator that I worked to get.
Granted, this is pretty extreme to go to the level of murdering, but they full-well knew the consequences of living on the edge.[/QUOTE]
I can see your point, but 90% of the time just pointing a gun at an intruder will be enough to scare them away. Or you can at least hold them until the police arrive. There really isn't any reason to shoot them unless they're pointing a gun at you as well.
[QUOTE=TheCombine;19693947]Misaimed fandom at its best.[/QUOTE]
It's cool because I recall an interview where Alan Moore said something to the effect that he had intentionally written the character to be entirely unrelatable and begging to be hated with almost no redeeming qualities whatsoever as a human being.
And yet people liked him the most.
Shows how sadistic we are as a species, I suppose.
[QUOTE=Lankist;19694057]It's cool because I recall an interview where Alan Moore said something to the effect that he had intentionally written the character to be entirely unrelatable and begging to be hated with almost no redeeming qualities whatsoever as a human being.
And yet people liked him the most.
Shows how sadistic we are as a species, I suppose.[/QUOTE]
You can source that interview.
If he intended for him to be a character that shows how vigilantism is wrong, than he clearly failed. He's a superhero by all standards and portrayed as an awesome detective.
And especially in the film, he was the only one with integrity and ends up being one of the main protagonists.
[QUOTE=Oecleus;19694160]You can source that interview.
If he intended for him to be a character that shows how vigilantism is wrong, than he clearly failed. He's a superhero by all standards and portrayed as an awesome detective.
And especially in the film, he was the only one with integrity and ends up being one of the main protagonists.[/QUOTE]
In an interview for the BBC's Comics Britannia, Moore stated that Rorschach was created as a way of exploring how an archetypical Batman-type character—a driven, vengeance-fueled vigilante—would be like in the real world. He concluded that the short answer was "a nutcase."
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rorschach_%28comics%29[/url]
Rorschach is the very definition of Misaimed Fandom.
[quote]Rorschach from Watchmen was intended to be a deconstruction of the objectivist superheroes created by Steve Ditko, most notably The Question and Mr. A: the embodiment of all that is repellent about Ditko's worldview and, at the same time, all that is noble about it. Rorschach is intelligent and uncompromising to evil with absolute moral integrity, but is a completely Ax Crazy dog kicker insane brand of character as a result. He is delusional and paranoid, but sometimes properly so when no one else is. He is a loner, unfettered by society's restrictions, but an ugly person with disgusting habits and prejudices who constantly rejects those who try to help him, and so on. Far too many readers and creators overlooked his more unsavory aspects and saw him as unambiguously heroic and unambiguously cool (or, most strangely, unambiguously ''sexy''... which he is not). As a result, Rorschach (along with the Batman of Dark Knight Returns) became the template for the less nuanced (and far more glorified) Dark Age Nineties Anti Hero. Alan Moore is known to deeply regret this; he never intended for Rorschach to be a role model and is reportedly disgusted when he receives fan-mail containing variations of the sentiment "Our society needs people like Rorschach." [/quote]
[url]http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MisaimedFandom[/url]
[editline]09:10PM[/editline]
To say that a writer failed because you are a stupid kid who doesn't understand satire is pretty ridiculous.
[editline]09:10PM[/editline]
I suppose you think having a real life Fight Club would be totally awesome too, right?
[editline]09:14PM[/editline]
And Robert Neville was the epitome of human integrity.
[editline]09:15PM[/editline]
And the moral of A Scanner Darkly was fucking drug addicts rite?
[QUOTE=Lankist;19694241]
To say that a writer failed because you are a stupid kid who doesn't understand satire is pretty ridiculous.
[editline]09:10PM[/editline]
I suppose you think having a real life Fight Club would be totally awesome too, right?[/QUOTE]
I'm saying he failed at portraying vigilantism as wrong because everything Rorschach does is just and logical, and he is intrepreted by almost everybody as a protoganist. Just because he has faults doesn't make him a non-hero.
I'd like for you to leave insults out of it too, I don't slip in insults like 'greasy spic who argues about everything who must be right' in my replies.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Don't call people greasy spics (even Lankist)" - TH89))[/highlight]
Hm. After seeing the Watchman movie my analysis of the message of it was that there were no "good" guy or "bad" guys, with the Comedian and Rorschach at opposing ends. On the surface it would be easy to label the Comedian a "bad" guy and Rorschach a "good" guy, but it's just not that simple. Even with all the injustices committed by the Comedian, he was still a superhero. And despite all of Rorschach's good deeds, he was still a psychopath.
[QUOTE=CanadianGouda;19694367]Hm. After seeing the Watchman movie my analysis of the message of it was that there were no "good" guy or "bad" guys, with the Comedian and Rorschach at opposing ends. On the surface it would be easy to label the Comedian a "bad" guy and Rorschach a "good" guy, but it's just not that simple. Even with all the injustices committed by the Comedian, he was still a superhero. And despite all of Rorschach's good deeds, he was still a psychopath.[/QUOTE]
Really? You thought comedian was a superhero?
[QUOTE=Oecleus;19694350]I'm saying he failed at portraying vigilantism as wrong because everything Rorschach does is just and logical[/QUOTE]
Uhh no.
He causes bodily harm to innocent bystanders with no regards to their lives simply because they might have occupied the same bar as the person he is hunting.
He murdered a wanna-be super villain who idolized him and the Watchmen but was harmless in reality. By shoving him down an elevator shaft.
He stalked, beat and abused a reformed criminal and cancer victim and, through his lack of any logic or forethought, got him killed.
He constantly displays sadism and a hatred for every single person in the city. He makes no claims to defending the innocent, rather seeing every person he meets as a potential and deserving victim.
He is homophobic.
He is fascist.
He is against sex as a whole, seeing it as filthy and wrong.
He is NOT a pinnacle of blind justice, rather a hypocrite showing extreme bias as even after he learned that the Comedian raped a fellow superhero, instead of punishing him for it he decided instead to AVENGE his later death.
His backstory outlines his descent from righteous dogooder to paranoid, fascist, murderous monster with no empathy, remorse or even a system of evidence.
[editline]09:27PM[/editline]
There is NOTHING good about Rorschach. He was a deconstruction of the noble superhero, and was designed to appear more the villain than the valiant knight.
[editline]09:28PM[/editline]
If you think Rorschach is an example of a good human being you need to see a fucking therapist before you shoot up your goddamn school.
Mexican batman strikes again.
[QUOTE=Oecleus;19694456]Really? You thought comedian was a superhero?[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't consider him one, but that's what he was. My point is simply that what I got out of the story was that there really aren't "good" or "bad" people. No matter how horrible someone is, they have good qualities, and no matter how good someone seems to be, they have a bad side too.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.