Judicial justice or vigilante justice - you decide.

The criminal justice system doesn’t always gets things right, and wouldn’t even if all those running it were honest and fair and sometimes it seems few of them are, but the alternative is far worse. Vigilante justice in which the citizens and police officers acts as judge, jury and executioner without given the accused a day in court is dangerous to all of society. You are foolish if you think because you are a law abiding citizens it has nothing to do with you. Road rage is vigilante justice! Today vigilante justice may seem justified by many in society when it comes to drugs, child abuse, elderly abuse, pedophiles and rape, but who is to say vigilante justice will stop with just those illegal acts.

If you think everyone ever accused of a crime is guilty I again say you are foolish. Innocent people can be targeted. Lisa-Jayne Samuels was given a 20 month sentence for making a false rape allegation against Terry Brown. Lisa-Jayne Samuels was a serial rape liar, but initially the police took her claim seriously. Mr. Brown was attacked by a vigilante mob who stabbed him. Even worse, his pregnant fiancée tripped and fell during a confrontation and suffered a miscarriage. The man was innocent and eventually Lisa-Jayne Samuels was charged for filing false charges and convicted.

American vigilantism originally came about as a frontier response to the threat and reality of crime. The first settlers who moved to the Deep South and the Old West were not protected by a criminal justice system. There were no law enforcement agencies, no regularly scheduled court sessions, no nearby jails or prisons, and there was a vast open spaces to which offenders could escape from their victims. In the absence of any legal system victims and their allies felt compelled to track down and round up outlaws and "take the law into their own hands.”  That is not the case today.

People claim that the justice system today is only for the wealthy. Those people who claim that and support vigilantism need to study history and see who the vigilantes punished and even killed. They did not go after the wealthy they went after the lower class people and marginalized people.  

Vigilantism usually is the results of the government not doing its job and the citizens becoming frustrated. Instead of correcting the problems in government it is easier for some in society to go after the one they deem the ‘criminal’. Anyone and I mean anyone who supports vigilantism is breaking the law.

To legitimize their lawless deeds, vigilantes argued that their ends justified their means. They claim they are trying to preserve traditions, enforce moral codes, and further respect for authority. Their biggest claim is that they are trying to protect law-abiding citizens from internal and external evil forces.

More concerned with suppressing disruptive behavior than with respecting due process some elected officials approve of vigilantism.  It is simple, direct, swift, certain and those that are looking for a so called quick fix will support vigilantism. They will turn a blind eye to all the evils of vigilantism.

The Ku Klux Klan in the United States was a vigilante group. Originally they went after husbands that were abusive or neglecting their families, but they then started going after Black people, Jews, Catholics and those that were said not to have paid a debt.  Black Life’s Matter Organization in the United States is a vigilante group.

If you support vigilantism then why do you not support revenge killings, drive-by shootings, turf battles between rival drug-selling groups, and mob hits among warring syndicates. These are all a type of vigilantism. Teenagers act as vigilantes when they attack homeless vagrants and drive them away or set them on fire. Police Officers themselves engage in police vigilantism if they beat a suspect on the street, during the ride to the police station, or in its basement, in order to make sure the perpetrator is punished before being released with a mere "slap on the wrist" by the "revolving door" of an lenient justice system. When society ignores vigilantism police officers feel more empowered to carry out their street justice (vigilantism).

 Some in The right-to-life movement—convinced that abortion constitutes murder—assassinated doctors who legally terminated pregnancies or bombed the clinics where these medical procedures are performed (vigilantism). White supremacist Neo-Nazi groups randomly attacked complete strangers because of their race or religion because they are seeking vigilante justice. Militia groups are vigilantes. They set up their own "common law courts."

Support any type of vigilantism and I will venture to say one day it will come back to haunt you. You will find yourself on the other side of the fence and then you will oppose curb justice or vigilantism.  When you have a government that is endorsing vigilantism there is nothing that will stop it and while you fight drug addicts and pusher today in a few years you will be fighting vigilantes. This should be of grave concern for those that feared the regime of Marcos in the Philippines.

The Philippines in 1915 earned the dubious distinction of having the worst record of 87 countries in bringing wrongdoers to justice, according to a study of countries plagued by impunity. Is this the drug pusher or drug addicts fault? I do not think corruption in the Philippines is the cause of impunity, but it is the results of impunity. If you believe you are not going to be caught or punished for a crime you are more likely to commit a crime. Yes, corruption contributes to impunity, but it is not the cause. A failed justice system is the root cause of impunity. I believe  countries that do not provide opportunities for economic development also fail to reduce the unequal access to security and justice for their citizens.

Most courts in the Philippines have over one thousand cases on their dockets – an impossible task. Is that the fault of drug users and drug pushers? The Justice Department claims there are not enough courts. Is that the fault of drug users and drug pushers? A lot of the courts that are established do not have judges to staff them. Is that the drug users and drug pushers fault? judges appointed to cases take longer than the time limitation of three months fixed by the Constitution for them to decide a case some cases go on for years. Is that the drug user or drug pushers fault? Do the cases move at a snail pace because there are no jury system in the Philippines and all cases are decided by a judge? If that is the case is that the fault of a drug user or drug pusher?  Maybe vigilantism looks good now, but will it really solve the problems that plagues Philippine justice?   I do not think so.

As of August 3, 2016 Police figures show that 402 drug SUSPECTS have been killed since the end of June. That figure does not include those slain by suspected vigilantes. Two hundred eleven more men are known to have been killed by vigilantes. These being killed are not rich people they are the poor in Philippine society. They are not the wealthy Drug Lords - many of them are a part of government. 565,805 have turned themselves in and promised to straighten out their lives and released. Drug addiction is not something you can cure with a promise and the Philippine government does not have the facilities or the funds to provide rehabilitation for these men. What has happen when these men turned themselves in they put a target on their backs to be killed by vigilantes.

Innocent until proven guilty - justice – equal treatment for all - moral legitimacy are the rights guaranteed to the people living under a democratic government and without those rights they might as well be living under a dictator or monarch.  Freedom is a slippery hill to climb and when you start sliding backwards you do not usually stop until you have lost all your freedom. 

Whites and Blacks participated in the integration cause - I was one of them!

Founded on Feb. 12. 1909, the NAACP is the nation's oldest, largest and most widely recognized grassroots-based civil rights organization. Its more than half-million members and supporters throughout the United States and the world are the premier advocates for civil rights in their communities, campaigning for equal opportunity and conducting voter mobilization. 

A group of white liberals that included Mary White Ovington and Oswald Garrison Villard, both the descendants of abolitionists, William English Walling and Dr. Henry Moscowitz issued a call for a meeting to discuss racial justice. Some 60 people, seven of whom were African American answered the call. 

The results of the meeting became the NAACP. The NAACP's stated goal was to secure for all people the rights guaranteed in the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution. The NAACP established its national office in New York City in 1910 and named a board of directors as well as a president, Moorfield Storey, a white constitutional lawyer and former president of the American Bar Association. The only African American among the organization's executives, Du Bois was made director of publications and research and in 1910 established the official journal of the NAACP, The Crisis. 

Joel Spingarn, white/Jew one of the NAACP founders, was a professor of literature and formulated much of the strategy that led to the growth of the organization. He was elected board chairman of the NAACP in 1915 and served as president from 1929-1939. He is responsible for the expansion of NAACP offices across the U.S.

In 1964 President Lyndon B. Johnson proposed a civil rights bill much stronger than J.F.K.’s.  Johnson’s civil rights bill required the government to stop funding for federal programs that allowed racial discrimination. It also called for the attorney general to file suits against school districts not integrating their schools. In August 1965 he signed the Voting Rights Act, which banned the various methods (literacy tests) that southern states had used to block African Americans from voting. President Johnson named the first black cabinet secretary and nominated the first black supreme Court Justice, Thurgood Marshall.

When you read about civil rights from black historians you most likely will read things like, “Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s. actions resulted in passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.”  Seldom do you find black’s giving whites any credit for them gaining their civil rights.  I simply do not believe Dr. King was the most important factor in the struggle for black advancement. I certainly do not believe he could accomplished what he did unless he had white men and women in the right positions to help. I also believe the country was ready to do away with segregation and if M.L.K had not stepped in someone else would. I think M.L.K was the right man for the time because he was not a radical like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Today blacks as a group still are not fully integrated into American life. Racial stereotypes persist. Hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan still exist, but DON’’T FORGET black racist groups exist like the Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, etc.  There are as many prejudice blacks as there are whites. 

I do not think you can legislate race relations.  Race relations must be taught at home and any parent that is not teaching their children to be color blind are failing their children. My mothers best friend was black and when I sold our home to a nice black family she refused to ever speak to my mother again. This woman was a high school teacher. She told me, “If I wanted to live by ‘niggers’ I would have stayed in fifth ward.” Civil rights organizers say efforts to keep blacks from moving into white neighborhoods remain common. I do not believe that. I think that many blacks that move into white neighborhoods do not want other blacks in the community and I gave one example by sharing a personal experience I had with a nice, educated, upper middle class black lady.

The churches, black and white, have failed to do their part in race relationships. In Galveston, Texas there is a black minister association and a white minister association. The black ministers refused to merge with the white ministers. I always suspected they objected to sharing any power with white ministers or they did not want white ministers involved in their churches. Churches are the most segregated places in the United States.

I am not saying that whites have not prosper simply because they are white because we all know we have. But, those white and black that were willing to work together have brought about advancement in civil rights. My family in Alabama were staunch segregationist – I MARCHED WITH DR. KING IN SELMA, ALABAMA. It is not a black or white issue it is all about having a non-judgmental attitude and your parents teach you that at home. My parents taught me we are all equal white, black, Latino, Asian, rich, middle class, poor educated and uneducated. When you are taught not to judge others unless you have walked in their shoes it is easy not to be a racist.

In my opinion Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have hindered the civil rights movement not helped it. I honestly believe their goal was and is to keep a wall between the races. If they did not keep problems brewing between the races there would be no need for Jesse or Al. It is not true that Jesse Jackson was part of M.L.K.'s inner-circle. M.L.K. believed Jesse Jackson to be an agitator. Jesse Jackson tried to force his way into M.L.K.'s inner-circle.