Sorry, can't upvote vigilante justice. Even if it is faked.

I'll find another one of yours to vote for....

Mel Guzman could have purchased it from a pawn shop, flea market or by any other legitimate means, for all we know. Yet some of you here and on youtube are passing judgement on this person. And I "love" how the speaker makes a snarky remark about having an unemployment form.

How many of you have not had to fill out an unemployment form?

Maybe this person couldn't afford the latest machine because he's, I don't know... unemployed? Maybe he didn't know how to reformat the drives on this machine? Since all the anecdotal information tells us is that Mel got the computer recently and just turned it on.

And before you people jump on my ass... lets read upon the law of Possession of Stolen Goods.

If the individual didn't know the goods were stolen, then the goods are returned to the owner and the individual is not prosecuted. Innocent possession is not a crime.. If Mel was the original thief, why would he still have the computer? Wouldn't a thief sell it quickly as possible to make money... Not hold on to it for 2 years then use it himself?

So it's okay to virtually lynch Mel Guzman... Vigilante Justice in a form of a Hacker Hipster is acceptable in Videosift world?

Videosift is liberal minded, yet there are 98 of you who just assume Mel Guzman stole this computer. You fuckers don't believe in due process before passing judgment?

And yes, it is true it's not the court of law. Yet this video has been viewed by over half of million people... What if one of these people were someone who wanted to hire Mel Guzman. Now because of some smug smart-ass douche bag, Mel Guzman will continued to be unemployed.

You know what would be true justice... If the authorities finds mp3's downloaded from Limewire and RIAA sue the speaker, because we all know Mel does not have the password to install any applications on this machine.

You bunch of phony liberal fuckers. I consider myself a center-right, yet even I know this is wrong.

Merry Fucking Christmas and Happy New Years Assholes.

>> ^choggie:
What we need, is one of these
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/23oct_superstorm.htm
The Carrington Event took out telegraph worldwide.....Another huge one would wreak untold havoc on satellites, innit??
While everyone was whining about not having their Crackberry fix or television, the Elite would be sitting targets for some good-old-fashioned guerrilla/vigilante justice. Take em in their homes, in their sleep....heads on pitons in the streets.


Crackberry....

I don't know why but that makes me laugh, a lot.

What we need, is one of these
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/23oct_superstorm.htm

The Carrington Event took out telegraph worldwide.....Another huge one would wreak untold havoc on satellites, innit??
While everyone was whining about not having their Crackberry fix or television, the Elite would be sitting targets for some good-old-fashioned guerrilla/vigilante justice. Take em in their homes, in their sleep....heads on pitons in the streets.

I didn't say death was an appropriate punishment for working at the IRS (its not), I said there isn't an innocent person working there. Its no different than being a police officer who enforces drug laws, or a solider who invades a sovereign country. So yeah, while I think you shouldn't fly planes into buildings; (didn't I say that in my post?) what else is this guy going to do? Walk in there and charge them with a crime? Kidnap them and keep them in a homemade jail? Nobody has a way to punish these people or defend themselves...thats what initiates vigilante justice - and vigilante justice is often as swift as it is brutal.

If you don't want vigilante justice, then you should support a lawful government that punishes all criminals - including those working for the government itself. I'm not going to applaud a vigilante, but I'm not going to condemn one either. Look at Central/South America...police are often corrupt and sometimes refuse to punish criminals. The people usually are too scared to act, but sometimes an evil enough criminal comes along and they burn him in the streets. Is that justice? Probably. Is it civilized? No. Is it better than violent criminals roaming around unpunished and unafraid? I'd say yes.

Personally, I'd rather live in a society where criminals are (over) punished by mob/vigilante justice than one where criminals are not punished at all. Maybe you have a different opinion, but who doesn't? You shouldn't take such a unilateral view to the subject because your ideas are far from enlightened. There is a lot of the world you haven't experienced, and I don't think you are nearly wise enough to patronize the views of others.
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
>> ^imstellar28:
Violence against innocent bystanders is unequivocally wrong, but at what point does violence become self defense? There wasn't a single innocent person working in that building. You shouldn't have to crash a plane into a building to get people to realize this, but what else is going to wake people up at this point?

So..... working for the government is justification for death?
Tough talk from a spoiled brat.

It's almost like the second bus driver saw the stop had been blocked off for the other bus and decided to exercise some vigilante justice and bust in there Kool-Aid Man style!

some vigilante justice i found on Greg Gutfeld's wikipedia:

""Houseboys

Although Greg Gutfeld is married, another running on the show is the fact that Greg has "houseboys" of various ethnicities. These houseboys are unpaid, and are acquired through advertisements in foreign papers for students wishing to "learn a skill abroad." Some houseboys are said to have suffered an untimely demise. Popular houseboys from the past include "Dat Ho," allegedly Vietnamese, "Julio," intentionally mispronounced "Julie-Oh" with a j-sound, and the Greek "Pilates." Occasionally, the houseboy reference is altered to that of a "pool boy." Greg is always clear that every houseboy that he employs is over the age of 18, although the veracity of his claims is always subject to mirthful skepticism from the panelists.""

>> ^MINK:
fuck this vengeance shit
fucking hate the fuck out of american news.>

It's not just a triumph because the kid was caught for what he was clearly trying to hide, this was vigilante justice at its best. The only reason that this kid was caught was because of the efforts of teh internets. And the internet isn't responding with violence. If you look at any response site, they don't seek violence. At the most, they are harassing him with phone calls, emails to his school/police/mother, and ordering a ton of catalogs to his house. If you know how the american justice system works, then you know he'll be fine, except maybe some surprise buttsex, and he'll get the reformative therapy that he needs.

>> ^lucky760:
none of you non-admins might care, but it's very important to us that the decision and sentencing be handled by a jury of peers.

I care. Seriously, I appreciate the theory, but in reality, siftquisitions are little more than vigilante justice. What credible court system allows the complainants and their friends to also sit on the jury?

That actually gives me an idea. How about having a rotating set of judges/jurors? Create a pool of potential judges from gold-100s and up, and randomly pick 9 (or 15 or whatever) that are not involved or haven't previously expressed an opinion on the matter. The case is presented by the original caller of the siftquisition, calling witnesses and presenting evidence as needed. The accused can either defend themselves or if they are unable to do so (due to absence or whatever), a representative would be appointed. The judges deliberate for up to a day, and render their decision. Final appeals to admins are allowed, but not necessarily accepted.

>> ^elysse:
yeah, someone fixed Fuld's nose shortly after this hearing:
http://www.te
legraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/3150319/Richard-Fuld-punched-in-face-in-Lehman-Brothers-gym.html
vigilante justice FTW.


http://www.videosift.com/video/Lehman-Brothers-CEO-Attacked-At-Gym-Knocked-Out-Cold

yeah, someone fixed Fuld's nose shortly after this hearing:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/3150319/Richard-Fuld-punched-in-face-in-Lehman-Brothers-gym.html

vigilante justice FTW.

"The entertainment industry can not act as police, judge, jury, executioner."

Amen, sister! That is exactly what this all comes down to. Never mind if their intentions are to make money or simply to catch bad guys, this sort of vigilante justice can not be accepted. At least not if you want to live in a society where criminal law is based upon the assumption that everyone is innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I know I do.

I doubt most of the folks that showed up were duped. More likely they assumed the fraudulent ad provided some legal cover for burglary.

As for Craigslist not providing the identity of the poster - hell yeah they better wait for a warrant! And given the circumstances, it should be trivial to get - for law enforcement agents. Imagine for a moment if craigslist had given this woman the name, number and address of the poster. They would be subject to endless litigation due to vigilante justice and would rightfully be driven into bankruptcy (not to mention potential federal criminal charges).

Downvote for idiots not securing their property and later whining about it getting vandalized.

ok, that "clerical error" part is way funnier than it should be.

Yet another lesson on why vigilante "justice" is not a good idea...

There's no DA in the country that would consider prosecuting the Samaritan. It wasn't "vigilante justice" because the criminal was a potential risk to the safety of others. If the douche had indicated he would surrender, subsequent assault would definitely be questionable, but attacking someone who you believe is a direct and immediate threat to others is entirely protected by law.

This reminds me of the cousin of Bode Miller who was in the news recently. He was pulled over by an officer who he then shot 4 times and drove over multiple times in his car. A passerby witnessed this, retrieved the then dead cop's gun from his utility belt, told the guy to lay down his arm, and then shot him to death when met with refusal. The DA very quickly decided it was a justified homicide.

Does this video really belong in the comedy channel? I didn't find any of it to be humorous. *nochannel