Vigilante

[Blind groper]

As some of you will know, I have suggested in the past that the cause for the incredibly high murder rate in the USA is partly the high rate of hand gun ownership, and partly a very unfortunate gun culture.

However, I recently gained a slightly different take on this from the writings of Professor Steven Pinker. This famous Canadian is a professor of psychology at Harvard University, and I completed reading his book on the history of violence.

Steven Pinker calls it a vigilante culture rather than a gun culture. He thinks the vigilante mind set is a root cause for a great deal of the violence in the world, and those nations and societies where the vigilante approach is stronger have more murders and more crimes of violence. The vigilante mind set involves partly the personal need to take the law into their own hands, and deliver their own form of justice, and partly involves a deep distrust of those professionals whose job is to administer justice. This includes the police, the courts, and the prisons.

Such people put an enormous emphasis on 'self defense' rather than relying upon police.

Pinker describes the vigilante approach in the old American wild west. This happened mainly due to the limited influence of authority, which drove people to take matters into their own hands. Personal justice and revenge drove the murder rate in the wild west to astoundingly high levels.

Sadly, a vestige of this attitude is, according to Pinker, very common among many Americans in this modern world. If a decent human feels this way, it probably does little harm. But not all people are decent, and if someone has a slightly 'bent' aspect, then that person may turn to personal violence. If a person is an out and out criminal, and shares the vigilante mind set, he is likely to be a murderer.

A move to a different mind set, in which revenge and justice is left to the police and other authorities, which is prevalent in Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, will reduce the level of violent crime, and especially murders.

[pErvinalia]

Hmm. I wonder what evidence he presents for this. How do the stats break down? What percentage of gun deaths are committed by already criminal people, vs accidents and previously non-criminal people? I have this picture of most gun deaths in the US being due to gang violence and other criminal activity. If that's true, that would seem to put pay to his idea that it was about distrust in authority/justice. A criminal is hardly going to use the justice system to get back at some wrong they perceive someone has done to them. Hence, in that case, there's no vigilantism. It's just a culture of violence. People have said that is what makes the US stand out from other nations - a history of violence and a large gun culture (and weak licensing laws, in a lot of cases). I'd tend to believe that before the vigilante theory, unless the stats show otherwise.

[Blind groper]

REvo

Pinker's bibiliography is as long as his book!

He has vast resources in terms of scientific papers studying human behaviour and what has happened in the past. I certainly cannot summarise it all here, but I was most impressed with his scholarship.

The vigilante attitude seems to permeate much of US society, and that does include criminals. A drug lord in Britain might choose to let a rival get away with stealing a bit of his market. In the USA, though, the same action leads to reprisals, based on the attitude of self directed 'justice'. Of course, what a drug lord considers justice is different to what the rest of us may think. But the end result is tragic.

[pErvinalia]

I seriously doubt that US criminals are any more or less vigilante like than criminals in other western nations. As an aside, I couldn't give a shit if criminals shoot each other. It's only when innocent people are killed that I care.

Regarding Pinker, I'd have to see the stats that I talked about to accept what he is saying. Pinker is a popular science writer and he benefits from saying novel and/or contrarian things. I have a slight distrust of the man, particularly because of his reputation in academic circles. He's more of a sensationalist than a rigorous researcher (at least when he is writing his books). Not to forget that, unless I'm mistaken, he's also in the loopy extreme of evolutionary psychology.

[FBM]

We ought to form a posse and go hunt the man down.

[Brian Peacock]

Hmm. I wonder what evidence he presents for this. How do the stats break down? What percentage of gun deaths are committed by already criminal people, vs accidents and previously non-criminal people? I have this picture of most gun deaths in the US being due to gang violence and other criminal activity. If that's true, that would seem to put pay to his idea that it was about distrust in authority/justice. A criminal is hardly going to use the justice system to get back at some wrong they perceive someone has done to them. Hence, in that case, there's no vigilantism. It's just a culture of violence. People have said that is what makes the US stand out from other nations - a history of violence and a large gun culture (and weak licensing laws, in a lot of cases). I'd tend to believe that before the vigilante theory, unless the stats show otherwise.

The issue isn't about guns of course but violence. Gun use is just an example.

You agree with Pinker when you say that the special class 'criminals' administer justice and retribution as they see fit, but you say that isn't vigilantism because it takes place beyond the scope of a legal jurisdiction.

I think you might need to change your brand of contrary potion to something stronger, or at least give some clue about what definition of vigilante you're running with.

[pErvinalia]

I'm using BG's definition of vigilantism.

[laklak]

Saddle up, compadres. We fixin to give this Pinker galoot an old fashioned necktie party.

[Blind groper]

Do you guys think that Americans are more prone to the vigilante approach? That is, more likely to use self administered "justice"? Compared to other countries in the OECD, that is.

[Seabass]

I would like to lower Blind Groper into a shark tank. Does that make me a vigilante?

[Blind groper]

Seabass.

That is like throwing Brair Rabbit into the bramble patch. I love sharks!

I have been a keen scuba diver for 48 years, and I keep a list of shark species I have been fortunate enough to see while scuba diving. So far, I am up to 23 species. It is an immense thrill to interact with them.

There are lots of myths about sharks, including the idea that they are out to get us. Wrong! Sharks do not have humans on their menu. It is rare for a shark to bite a human, and almost unheard of for any shark to treat us as food. The most common reaction I get is from sharks to take fright and swim off. Now and again, I am fortunate enough to see a curious shark, that will swim close enough for me to take its photo. Those are the moments that make life worth while.

So, Seabass, try to think of a more credible threat. That one just pleases me.

[Seabass]

A Seth tank?

[FBM]

America. Throw him in America.

[Blind groper]

Depends which part of America. I thoroughly enjoyed my visit to the Grand Canyon. A most impressive place.

I also have had a desire for a long time to visit, and scuba dive Catalina Island in California. I would also love to do the same off Vancouver Island in Canada (which is still America).

As for a Seth tank, I dunno. It would be interesting to meet the guy. You never know. In person, we might actually like each other. Being debate opponents on gun issues does not make personal hostility inevitable.

[FBM]

Grand Canyon, eh? You're lucky you left Arizona alive.