I Long For Vigilante Justice

I am a huge proponent of about two percent vigilante justice. It's unfortunate that this can't actually be implemented into society as we know it because who is going to decide which two percent of things will qualify and be justified to be handled by a vigilante mob and/or individual? Personally, I think that I'd do a pretty good job at it. How about if I take a test run and you let me know how I did? OK, then. Let's see...scanning....looking....reading....oh. Wait. What's this? Ahhh. I think I have a winner! From the Sydney Morning Herald, we have "A former top South African rugby player has allegedly hacked three people to death in a revenge attack after his daughter was reportedly gang-raped and infected with HIV." Uh-huh. And?

Now, provided that the axe-wielding gentleman in question has the right people, I am perfectly OK with those actions. I would have no trouble what so ever with returning that man to live out the rest of his life amongst society. I wouldn't even care if he wanted to move in next door to me. Hell, I'd invite him to move into the neighborhood. That's someone you don't want to mess with. Screw an alarm system when your neighbor will go after evil-doers with an axe.

According to the article, the guy was thorough. "The three people were reportedly butchered with an axe last week. One person was decapitated and the head found in a dustbin nearly two kilometres away." See? He's not such a bad guy. He put the (alleged) rapist's severed dome in a garbage can so as not to deface a public venue. I'm against littering. And I'm still on this guy's side.

The guy was arrested and according to a one Lieutenant Colonel Vincent Mdunge (you can pronounce that however you'd like), "He is currently being detained in one of our police stations. We can't disclose where for security reasons." Hmm. Security reasons. As in...if people knew where this guy was there would be a non-stop parade for him in front of said police station? As in...if people knew where this guy was they would start committing their own crimes in the hopes that they'd be arrested and thrown in a cell with him so that they could shake his hand in person? I'm unclear as to the "security reasons" that they can't disclose the police station. Not that it matters to me. I, personally, don't care where he is being held. I just find it odd that they don't want to tell us.

But in my world, this guy wouldn't be in jail at all. I see absolutely nothing wrong with killing the people who raped your fourteen year old daughter and infected her with HIV. That falls directly within my two percent of vigilante justice guidelines. And if the guy were to be released today, I'd gladly contribute to a fund to buy him a new axe. What?! I'm sure he probably needs one. When you use the same axe to hack three rapists to death, I'm pretty sure that you're going to be in the market for a replacement. The old axe he can hang on his wall. Or outside of his home as a reminder to people what happens in the Two Percent Vigilante Justice World of my dreams.

Sphere: Related Content

ADHD Does NOT Cause Tattooed Genitalia

When a story comes from The Local, Sweden's News in English, you know it's going to be good. No exception here with this headline: "Boyfriend blames ADHD for genital tattoo abuse." God, I love the Swedish press.

Apparently what we have here is a 25-year old guy from Umea (that's in northern Sweden, in case you're reading this today without your globe or atlas) who has been charged with aggravated assault of his girlfriend which included, among other things, "...tattooing his name and ID number on her sexual organs." Well, that's a little murky, how about some details?

He doesn't just have the one assault charge. No, he has 17 assault charges. And he took his time to rack them up also, as they took place over a period of five years. Why it hadn't been dealt with before then is anyone's guess and it wasn't explained in the article. But that's OK because there's better stuff to get into! Hoo-boy, is there.

The man is accused of "...punching his girlfriend on several occasions between 2004 until February 2009 when the woman left him." (Maybe she was busy, we don't know.) It would seem that it really takes something fairly extreme for this woman to leave such a relationship. And I'm not talking fairly extreme by my standards or by your standards. I'm talking fairly extreme for a person who is not quite right.

Aside from the five years with all of the punching, he is also accused of "...assaulting her with a fork and re-opening the head wound as it began to heal." No word on whether or not the same utensil was used in the re-opening as was used in the initial opening of said head. He is also accused of "...forcing her to consume his medicine to ensure that she kept him company during the time that he was awake." (Translation of "his medicine": Meth. I'm guessing.)

Well, see, THAT explains it! She knew how LONELY he was, so she stayed. Or, perhaps, she's just a little fuzzy on what a healthy relationship entails. (Here's a hint: No forks in the head. Ever.) But I don't know how she'd be able to explain staying, yes staying, staying with hm after he allegedly "forced her to submit to a tattoo on her sexual organs - of his name and personal identification number." All rightee then. I don't rightly know what to say about that, other than OW!OW!OW!OW!OOWWW!!!!

Personal identification number? Like his Social Security Number? Not that it matters, mind you, I'm just curious. Was he planning on spending the rest of his life with her and went to that extreme measure to ensure that just in case he forgot his wallet, if she was with him (and remember, he sounded lonely, so she would probably drugged up and by his side at all times in his little fantasy world) he'd always have that ID number. It'd be a little awkward on days she was wearing pants, I suppose. Oh, but I'm sure he thought this thing through enough. I'm sure he had a way around that!
Since something like that is pretty hard to deny when you're on trial, he seems to have taken to just defending his actions with the most likely rationale that he could come up with. That being that he was "...suffering from the condition ADHD - attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder - and it resulted in him becoming angry at minor incidents which in turn caused him to turn violent." I see.

The problem with that defense, other than it's pathetic, is that it's kind of...um, what's the word I want? Oh, I've got it! Wrong. It's wrong. It seems to me that in order to, well, do anything, really, with a woman's genitalia requires a bit of effort and concentration. But in order to be able to TATTOO your name AND your personal identification number, um, down there, well that would seem to require a great deal, an IMMENSE deal of concentration in order to get the task at hand finished. (Good Lord, how painful must that have been? Tattooing. THAT. ON her. Yikes. Too bad she wasn't some sort of body builder because then she could have just crushed his skull between her knees like a vice. What an A-hole.)

And what, pray tell, what would be the "minor incident" that provoked Mr. ADHD there into grabbing the tattoo gun and going to town with it on her nether regions? Dinner not ready on time? Tattoo your girlfriends genitalia! Long day at the office? Blow off some steam by tattooing your girlfriend's genitalia! Can't get the bloody lawnmower to start? No worries! Just tattoo your girlfriend's genitalia and feel your problems just fade away! Are we really supposed to believe that a "minor incident" would result in a "major tattoo upon ones sexual organs"? I don't we are. I know that we can't!

So after all of that, after the cranium stabbed with fork incident...TWICE, after the five years of punching, after all of the staying awake to stave off loneliness, after all of that, none of it was enough to cause her to think to herself, "I wonder if there's something more for me out there." So what finally did it? What was the final straw? Ironically (in a way), "The woman finally decided to leave the man in mid-February 2009 when she suffered nerve and muscle damage in her legs after having been attacked with an axe."

So when he finally grabs the AXE and begins using it ON HER in an axe-like manner, that's when she begins to see the light and decides it's time to walk away from their fairy tale life together? When she's at the point where she literally CANNOT walk away, she decides to walk away? Interesting.

There are only two items in this sordid tale of 'Boy meets girl' that are encouraging. The first, obviously, is that she finally left. She might have limped away, she might have crawled away, but regardless as to how, she left. Excellent. The second is that this guy, having admitted to these actions and deciding to go with the "It was the ADHD" defense, is a pathetic moron who, I'm assuming, will likely be convicted. I mean, I know nothing is ever guaranteed or anything, especially in a legal system, but this seems like a pretty done deal in the arena of him being convicted. The only way it could be more of a lock would be if, say for instance, they found his blood with matching DNA at the crime scene and bloody gloves used in the attack behind his house and then he led police on a low-speed chase down an LA freeway. And I see this as being similar to a scenario like that, where the jury would have to be stocked full of fools in order for someone like the one in my example in order to not be convicted.

Oh. Whoops.

OK, the jury would have to be stocked full of fools in my "hypothetical" example in order to not be convicted. (Wow. Unfortunate choice to use for the sake of comparison there.)

Sphere: Related Content

Shame On The Axe Murderer

No one really enjoys being embarrassed. It's not fun. But you know, it is preferable over some other things that one could be in lieu of being embarrassed. Take death for example. Death after being hacked with an axe for the purpose of sparing you 'embarrassment'. Yeah, that seems a bit worse than the embarrassment itself. But apparently not to the axe hacker, it didn't.

A one Reinhard Steinbauer of Austria had what I'll call fairly strong feelings about embarrassment, especially those feelings about his family members who would have been shamed and embarrassed due to his actions. See, ol' Reinhard there had lost right around €300,000 euros (That's $574,000 in US declining in value dollars.) by investing in high risk speculations. Therefore, he concluded that in order "to spare them 'the shame' " ('them' being his family members) the most logical thing to do was to hack all five of them to death with an axe (which seems like more of the 'high risk' behavior that got him to the place he was at in the first place). Wait. What?

Correct. Reinhard is described as a "freelance public relations consultant". He clearly could not have been very good at his job, as hacking your family to death with an axe isn't exactly a tried and true way of improving public relations. Ending them, perhaps. But, then again, it does say that he was "freelance", so perhaps that was the niche that he carved out for himself (oh, pun SO intended there. SO intended.). So on May 13th of this year, he went out and bought himself an axe. Then he used it (and not to chop wood). Five times too many.

Reinhard the Hacker went to his home first and killed his wife and 7-year old daughter. Before leaving to hack up other family members, Reinhard "called the Finance Ministry (where his wife worked) and told her bosses that she would not be coming to work due to illness." Of course, because he wouldn't want her employers to worry about her or anything like that. How considerate of him. (Due to illness. Um, yeah, she's had a, um, de-nogginization and really needs to rest.) Then, feeling the need to abolish shame and embarrassment everywhere, he drove about 111 miles to where his parents were. (So, that would be about 2 hours of driving. You've just killed your wife and child and now you're going to drive for two hours to kill a little bit more. That's dedication to your craft, I'll give him that. Lunatic.) Not wanting to continue on with the mayhem on an empty stomach, he proceeded to have lunch with his mom and dad and after lunch, the dessert was axe a la mode as he killed both of them as well. And let's not forget the extended family in this bizarre, travelling massacre! Let's drive a little bit further and axe up the father-in-law as well, shall we? Well, we shall not. Reinhard there shall. And did.

So now what? You've just killed all five members of your fairly immediate family with an axe.You've already eaten, so you're not really hungry, even with all of the exertion that it must require to kill five people with an axe all in the same day. So what to do, what to do? I know! How about you make a quick stop over at that brothel over there, Hacky? And so he did. He stopped in at the whorehouse, presumably got himself a whore, whored her, and then left. That's when he attempted to kill himself and failed. Wait. What?

So, he can hack five people to death with no problems what so ever. But trying to off himself? THAT is trickier? How so, you sick and twisted coward? How so? Axe a little dull after slicing through the flesh and bones of five others, is it? You, sir, are an ass, to put it extremely mildly.

When all of the killing of self didn't go so well, he went down to the police station, covered in blood, and turned himself in. A police spokesman, a one Michael Braunsperger, made this statement: "It is not possible to conclude whether he is suffering from some mental disorder, but one would assume that a normal person would not be capable of committing such a crime in cold blood.” Oh, you think?! Mental or not, I'm fairly certain that there's some degree of disorder present with this guy! But thanks for the update there, Captain Obvious.

They must do things fairly quickly over there in the Austrian legal system, as The Lopper was found guilty today and sentenced to life imprisonment, a sentence which he had asked for himself. (I'm guessing that was a pretty easy request to accommodate.) At some point during the sentencing phase, the prosecutor, a one Michael Radasztics, told Reinhard, "You had neither the right nor the obligation to kill them. You take yourself for a god in whom you don't even believe." Um, what? I am familiar with the usual courtroom berating speech of "You had no right..." Yeah, yeah, we know that. I'd like to know more about the circumstances in which someone would have "the obligation" to kill someone else. Or five someone else's. The number isn't so much the issue as it is "the obligation" which, apparently, might have been an option over there! Is there paperwork involved with that obligation? I'm so confused.

So, what have we learned? The world is full of some sick and twisted individuals. What else have we learned? A lot of them live in Austria where there may or may not be an obligation for one individual to kill another individual or five. I think we've also learned that shame or embarrassment, no matter how great, isn't really all that bad when compared to getting hacked up by a family member. Bring on the shame!

Sphere: Related Content