alt Hacker NewsThe way I see it, there are 2 concepts - morality and legality.
Morality is complex to codify perfectly without contradictions but most/all humans are born with some sense of morality (though not necessarily each the same and not necessarily internally consistent but there are some commonalities).
Legality arose from the need to codify punishments. Ideally it would codify some form of morality the majority agrees on and without contradictions. But in practice it's written by people with various interests and ends up being a compromise of what's right (moral), what people are willing to enforce, what is provable, what people are willing to tolerate without revolting, etc.
> retaliatory murder
Murder is a legal concept and in a discussion of right and wrong, I simply call it a killing.
Now, my personal moral system has some axioms:
1) If a punishment is just, it doesn't matter who carries it out, as long as they have sufficient certainty about what happened.
2) The suffering caused by the punishment should be proportional by roughly 1.5-2 to the suffering caused to the victim (but greater punishment is acceptable is the aggressor makes it impossible to be punished proportionally).
Rape victims often want/try to commit suicide - using axiom 2, death is a proportional punishment for rape. And the victim was there so they know exactly what happened - using axiom 1, they have the right to carry out the punishment.
So even if they were not gonna be raped again, I still say they had the moral right to kill him. But of course, preventing further aggression just makes it completely clear cut.
---
> No one should take matters into their own hands
I hear this a lot and I believe it comes down to:
1) A fear that the punisher does not have sufficient proof or that aggressors will make up prior attacks to justify their actions. And those are valid fears, every tool will be abused. But the law is abused as well.
2) A belief that only the state has the right to punish people. However, the state is simply an organization with a monopoly on violence, it does not magically gain some kind of moral superiority.
3) A fear that such a system would attract people who are looking for conflict and will look for it / provoke it in order to get into positions where they are justified in hurting others. And again, this is valid but people already do this with the law or any kind of rules - do thing below the threshold of punishment repeatedly to provoke people into attacking you via something which is above the threshold.
---
BTW thanks for the links, I have read the wiki overview but I'll read it in depth tomorrow.
My thoughts and views on this matter are informed by my beliefs as much as by the law.
Morality doesn’t flow downstream from legality, but the other way around: legality is downstream of morality. Unjust laws ought not be followed in the same way that unlawful orders must be disobeyed. Yet, one must submit to the law and its consequences in order for civil disobedience to function.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Vengeance belongs to the Lord, after all.
I find their actions troubling, but not inherently justified. The fact that they faked injuries in order to present themselves as victims is especially concerning, but considering their father’s connections in the police department, I think they feared retaliation even after their abuser was killed. It’s a really tragic case. The fact that they were questioned initially without legal representation or knowledge of their rights further muddies the waters, but all we really know is a man is dead. He should have been tried and convicted, and then jailed or executed, because he seems entirely guilty, but we don’t have all the facts. I think we know enough to determine that he was isolating and abusing them, with no escape or end in sight. They were not able to imagine any other life. They deserved to look their abuser in the eye in court and see him convicted, but their own actions, and his, seemed to make that a near impossibility. With conviction comes the possibility of forgiveness and salvation, and I hope that they are able to find the peace that forgiveness brings, not that he himself seems to deserve it, from them especially.
The good news is that the women are likely to have all charges dropped.
The cycle of violence associated with feuds and bad blood are linked with honor cultures especially. I don’t know much about the psychology of the individuals involved in this case, but the fact that their father literally rang a bell and expected his daughters to be at his beck and call leads me to believe that he didn’t see them as having the same rights as he did, if he even thought of them at all outside of what they could do for him. Their uncle, the brother of their father, seems to claim a grievance, and I am concerned that this cycle of violence may not be over.
Hurt people hurt people. Hate can’t drive out hate. Only love can do that. I hope that the girls can find some peace and happiness in this world, and even someone or something to love. Lord knows they found little of that in life so far.