The point I was making… Is that the article brought a red herring fact that has nothing to do with anything
Why did they bring it up?
It was not a red herring in the least, and it struck to the very core of my own criticisms: while some vigilantes may be very stringent about their own investigations and targets, others may not.
In this example, these vigilantes artificially engineered a target where none was likely to ever exist. They drew the target in using the profile of a perfectly legal 18yo woman, but then turned around and claimed that the target was actually chasing the profile of an 17yo - and illegally young - girl, when he was in fact not doing so.
This was a very clear situation of entrapment by false pretenses.
Tell me you completely failed to grok my criticisms without saying that they flew clear over your head at 10,000m
The point I was making… Is that the article brought a red herring fact that has nothing to do with anything
Why did they bring it up?
It was not a red herring in the least, and it struck to the very core of my own criticisms: while some vigilantes may be very stringent about their own investigations and targets, others may not.
In this example, these vigilantes artificially engineered a target where none was likely to ever exist. They drew the target in using the profile of a perfectly legal 18yo woman, but then turned around and claimed that the target was actually chasing the profile of an 17yo - and illegally young - girl, when he was in fact not doing so.
This was a very clear situation of entrapment by false pretenses.
That’s what police already does tbh
Also, if somebody is doing that and gets caught, I doubt they will get any sympathy from society.
Vigelanty justice only works when target deserved like the dead CEO, otherwise it just crime.