Vigilantes our most famous in the late nineteenth century in the Midwestern United States. Where a vigilante law system was widely used. But first, the actual definition of a vigilante is someone who takes law enforcement into one’s own hands or a member in a vigilance committee (Dictionary). In this time period, in small towns where no legal system or law enforcement was put into place, a vigilance committee could have been made. Where by there is no legal officers, just normal people. Here people would stand trial and sentence would be carried out. The sentencing was built on a revengeful scale of repercussions. A Code of Hammurabi type of mentality was used. Death was a common sentencing. Sentence was carried out immediately. One example of a vigilance committee is in California in the late 1840’s where the gold rush began. It

Another example of a vigilance committee was in the early to mid twentieth century with the rise of the Italian Mafia in New York and other large cities. The mafia originally started as a form of protection for Italian immigrants in America. The Italian Americans felt the police did not help them in anyway or serve justice where justice was due. So, the citizens turned to the mafia for justice. Here people would pay dues to the mafia bosses in return for protection from other people and other businesses. However this quickly turned into a moneymaking business that eventually lost its original purpose. So when something happened to an Italian American they could go to the mafia and in return for some money justice could be served. Depending on the circumstances, this way of handling things could be considered legitimate. For example, let us say there is an Italian American person living in New York City in Hell’s Kitchen, and they were just robbed by another person. They have two choices, they can either go to the police, or go to the local mafia and pay them money to bring the robber to justice. By going to the police there could two possible outcomes. One, the man could be caught and convicted, or the man could be caught and released for a variety of reasons. The second possible outcome and the most probable is that the police would never catch the man and nothing would happen. By going to the vigilante group, in this case the mafia, in exchange for monetary payment the man could either be caught and dealt with by the mafia or never caught. In either circumstance either justice via the police or the mafia there is a chance of failure. However, the chance the police will find the assailant is less than that of the mafia finding him. Morally speaking depending on what the mafia would do in this situation would determine its moral standpoint. Anything action that is done as revenge would be considered immoral. Such as stealing after you were stole from, or murder after someone killed a loved one. Vengeance is not the answer. As the good book tells us what Jesus says ”you say an eye for an eye but I say turn the other cheek.”

Morally speaking vigilantes fall in the middle of the road. Depending on the situation determines whether it is morally acceptable. Bringing justice depends on what the action will be whether it is acceptable or not. It also depends on whether there is a legitimate reason for the whole chain of events. If someone didn’t do anything then how could you morally sentence them bring them to justice. This issue is a perfect example of where situational ethics is used. For example, if you key my car and then I decide to run you down in the parking lot in my car, am I justified

Some topics in this essay:
Klux Klan, Hell’s Kitchen, Code Hammurabi, World Book, American Government, School Klan, Midwestern United, Middle East, Italian Americans, Laws United, law enforcement, bring justice, vigilance committee, own hands, ku klux, ku klux klan, klux klan, properly bring justice, italian american, moral standpoint, government established, justice vigilantes, vigilantes government fails, government fails bring, example vigilance committee,