WI there was a vigilante?

There is a vigilante. John Walsh, the host of America's Most Wanted. Think about it. His was son murdured in the early 1980s and Walsh used America's Most Wanted to search for his killer.
 
There is a vigilante. John Walsh, the host of America's Most Wanted. Think about it. His was son murdured in the early 1980s and Walsh used America's Most Wanted to search for his killer.

That is not a vigilinate though. Walsh does not go outside of the law to deal with crime. He works inside of the system.
 
Real-life vigilantes tend to attack social outcasts and minorities - think lynch mobs or the KKK. They don't generally attack heavily-armed criminals a la Punisher, they usually go after old ladies who live by themselves and who have no friends in the community or economic migrants they blame for stealing work. Basically they go after the weak, not the strong.

However, there are real people who dress up in costumes hoping to fight crime, they call themselves Real-Life Superheroes, or Reals. They're mostly American and they mostly achieve nothing on the crime fighting front. Here, I wrote a long essay about them for the online comic book community I'm on:

Following the post about which superhero universe is better to live in and the ensuing discussion on the psychology of the superhero, I thought it would be interesting to talk about the self-styled "Real-Life Superheroes" or Reals. It's something I've been thinking about for a while now. Anyway, these are real people who dress up in costume and go out to fight crime. Perhaps you've heard about them before, but if not, here are several articles about them:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-life_superhero
www.rollingstone.com/news/story/25020634/the_legend_of_master_legend
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5404186.ece
www.columbiachronicle.com/paper/arts.php


There's apparently even a documentary about one real-life Justice League - they call themselves Superheroes Anonymous. Okay, it's actually an annual conference for real life superheroes, not a team.

What's fascinating is finding out about how these Reals act and what ostensibly motivates them, and also reading between the lines and speculating about them. This is not Watchmen, Nite Owl never had a poster of Captain America in his living room. I think this is the biggest difference between our world and any comic book universe, since none of them have 80 years' worth of superhero comics establishing what superheroes are before anyone ever tried putting on costumes and fighting crime.

Legally speaking, Real-Life Superheroes are merely vigilantes, but I think it's useful to distinguish them from other vigilantes. Regular vigilantes, masked or not, tend to harass and kill minorities and other groups not part of "proper" society - I recall the white New Yorker and mugging victim who shot two guys for the crimes of being black and in the same subway car as him, while there are South African vigilantes who harass Namibian immigrants when they're not executing drug dealers and burning witches. Being a vigilante means abandoning the law, after all, and to me it always seemed hypocritical of Spider-Man to break the law by attacking criminals while afterwards expecting the law to serve his purposes by depositing said criminals to the police all webbed up (and let's not even get into the legal issues - what, police are supposed to arrest someone who was obviously beaten into unconsciousness because a note pinned to his chest says he's a mugger?). The closest Real-Life Superhero to this ethos would have to be Angle Grinder Man, who removes parking boots from cars as part of his struggle against "the repressive shackles of a corrupt government".

No, what distinguishes the Reals from the regular vigilantes is that there's an element of play, of performance, in their actions. If they only wanted to hide their identities, they could just wear ski masks, but they go whole hog and make up costumes and bombastic names for themselves. They consciously emulate their fictional role models, as is obvious from reading the membership criteria of the World Superhero Registry: members must have a costume, must perform Heroic Deeds, and cannot be a paid representative of any organization. And witness the name of Superheroes Anonymous - obviously a play on Alcoholics Anonymous, and a self-conscious recognition of the fannish obsession and the possibility for ridicule bound up in being a Real-Life Superhero.

So what we have are a few hundred people, mostly Americans, who are essentially playing dressup and who only occassionally help out the odd person here or there (in fact, it seems to be a common complaint of Reals that most of the time, they drive around all night without spotting any crime). Skimming the World Superhero Registry, it appears that a lot of their activities involve things like helping stranded motorists, shoveling the sidewalks of seniors, looking out for the homeless, and other mundane, non-violent stuff. The most realistic comic book portrayal of this lifestyle would have to be Twilight Guardian, who only patrols a few blocks in her suburban neighbourhood and who spends her time feeding deer jerky to cats and wondering about the lives of the people she glimpses (and whatever happened to that comic, anyway?). Any realistic portrayal of superheroics would have to include the realization that the police, with their greater resources, are actually much better at stopping crime.*

Still, while Reals are not rich, it's also obvious that they're not poor. Some of them buy special equipment, and just getting the material for a costume would cost money that someone living in a ghetto probably couldn't afford. Here we come up against another barrier that prevents a Real from being an effective crimefighter - ignorance. Theoretically, with the right contacts and information an ordinary person could fight criminals effectively when not encumbered by due process, but how many middle class jerks know which bars the underclass frequent? How many junkies and hookers would roll over on the (usually gun-wielding) drug dealers in their neighbourhood a la Punisher and Batman for the sake of some middle class do-gooder, costumed or not? How many Reals can even talk in a way that wouldn't get them beaten up? Remember the scene in Training Day when the rookie undercover cop asked a dealer for "crack"? Remember how the dealer immediately knew he was a cop because he didn't use the proper street name for crack? That's what would probably happen if any Real tried to do the undercover thing.**

Perusing the stories about Real-Life Superheroes, there seems to be an element of pathos that runs through them, and unkind observers might say that it descends from pathos into bathos; that is, while Reals might have motivations that, while often pathetic, still evoke sympathy, the way that they act out their desires plunges the whole thing into the realm of the ridiculous. One might chart the Reals as being on one end of a comic book fan continuum, starting from the guy who watches superhero movies and ending with the guy who tries to be one. Remember the two out of shape pasty white guys posing in front of the Captain America poster?

I think it's instructive, though, to look at a Real-Life Superhero who most closely realizes the ideal type, the eidos, of the superheroic: Terrifica (1, 2), who is also my favourite Real. Terrifica patrols the bars of New York and tries to protect other women from the legions of sleazy guys who prey upon them. She has the Secret Identity: by day she works for a computer consulting company among unsuspecting coworkers, by night she rights wrongs in a gaudy costume among drunken bar-goers. She has the Origin Story: after getting dumped by her boyfriend when she moved to New York, mild-mannered Sarah created Terrifica to deal with her feelings of heartbreak and vulnerability. She has the Mission: to prevent women in bars from being taken advantage of by the pickup artists. She has the Special Vehicle, the Carrific, which I think is just the regular car she uses. She has the Superhero Gadgets, in this case the utility belt (aka fanny pack) where she stores her cellphone, lipstick, pepper spray, and other items necessary to doing good. She even has the Arch-Nemesis: Fantastico, the unapologetic philanderer who once seduced Sarah and whose bar room seductions she frequently breaks up.

She's definitely got the Superhero Drama. There's the Batman thing with trying to rescue her younger self every time she goes out in costume, especially the almost multiple personality thing where she refers to her civilian identity as being another person. But she's also got the Spider-Man thing of suddenly becoming outgoing and confident when she dons her mask. Just like Spider-Man, she's got her supporters and her detractors, and she even quit for a while, apparently because her coworkers were close to unmasking her. She must have had several moments of stomach-churning dread and anxiety at the prospect of discovery. And reading between the lines, it seems she's also almost as lonely as Bruce Wayne, since a lot of her nights are taken up by being Terrifica. Is she lonely because she's Terrifica, or did she become Terrifica because she's lonely?

The World Superhero Registry lists her as being retired, but even if she is, if you read the comments from her fans it's obvious she inspired quite a few people in her career. Yes, it's ridiculous to dress up in a costume and right wrongs as a way of dealing with your psychological issues. But it's also undeniable that she helped people along the way, even if it was just by being an example. She probably accomplished more for her mission than any of the costumed guys cruising around in their cars ever did for theirs. As a woman and as someone whose raison d'etre doesn't even involve violence, Terrifica is not the image of the comic book hero. However, her experiences certainly encapsulate that of the comic book hero: alter egos, temporary retirements, romantic entanglements and so on. How many of her male counterparts chomping at the bit for some costumed smackdown could claim a career as eventful as hers?

Here, then, is what it is to be a superhero in real life: the best Real-Life Superhero is the one who is the least like a comic book hero.


*One of the reasons I found the comic Kick-Ass stupid was because at one point the protagonist wondered why no one else had ever tried to fight crime in a costume, when these Reals had already existed for years. Of course, another reason is that Kick-Ass is actually effective, which only works in a fantasy.

**The biggest exception to this middle class uniformity would have to be Superbarrio, a Mexican street vendor who protects low-income neighbourhoods by organizing labour protests and files petitions, and who apparently doesn't ever try to use his fists to achieve his goals. However, it's clear that his model isn't the comic book superhero, but the Mexican luchadores, who do this kind of masked community activism all the time.
 
Real-life vigilantes tend to attack social outcasts and minorities - think lynch mobs or the KKK. They don't generally attack heavily-armed criminals a la Punisher, they usually go after old ladies who live by themselves and who have no friends in the community or economic migrants they blame for stealing work. Basically they go after the weak, not the strong.

:confused: um, those aren't vigilantes, they're lynch mobs. Vigilantes are people who are not law enforcement, but take it upon themselves to go after criminals, outside the law. They specifically target criminals, not minorities or innocent bystanders. Vigilantes aren't any more legal than lynch mobs, but their targets are completely different.
 
Anywhay,

Here is our vigiliant.

Rorschach_by_banshuwa.jpg
 
I see a lot of debate over the morality of vigilantism rather than practical consequences in a TL. Obviously, vigilantes would think they're doing the right thing, but the good and evil of it is besides the point of this thread. Stay on subject.

Who does it and why? Is it OTL and someone makes a decision to go vigilante? Is there an ATL incident (like a crime/crimewave, or a movie or a speech) that leads to an increase in vigilante behavior? Are they cops, military, or average people?

Is it public or secret? Is/are the vigiliante(s) leaving a big mess that leads to a lot of media attention? Do they seek media attention, or just want to clean things up on the sly?

My take would be a group of military vets, some of whom join a police department. They'd get their information on the local criminal community from their police members, then try and make all their hits look like gang or mob activity. They get away with it for a long time because staying free, anonymous and alive is higher on their list of priorities than making an impact; they pass up quite a few opportunities for hits just because of 'paranoia', or something not feeling right. They slip up about a decade in- one of their own gets killed on 'reconnaissance' and the whole thing unravels in a big public spectacle.

I think of it somewhere between Magnum Force and Without Remorse (oh god, why did those two need to rhyme?)
 
Last edited:
Cop
Say a police officer decides he has had enough, and that is it. This is more likely to gain the defense of the Blue Wall, while at the same time alienating the general public. While we enjoy the idea of a citizen defending the world, police abusing their powers tends to scare us. Now as a minority is more likely to commit a crime the image of a cop (black, or white) gunning down gangmembers will cause a minor moral panic. Of course the counter is that a small group of police could freely overlook or cover for what they see as a needed evil. A side effect could be groups like Internal Affiars being given a greater position of authority, and arresting powers throughout the USA.

We already had this in San Antonio when I was a teenager.

All admirers of vigilantes, take a look at what the real thing looks like.

-------------------
http://www.crimezzz.net/serialkillers/S/SMITH_stephen_richard.php
SMITH Stephen Richard1986/08/17
US.gif
skull.gif
.........3+ 1982 1986 TXVerdict/Urteil: A policeman turned homicidal vigilante in San Antonio, Texas, Stephen Smith was not exposed until his death, at the hands of a one-time friend and former patrol partner.

The shooting of one police officer by another is guaranteed to rate headlines, but initial reports paled in comparison to statements from Smith's killer, charging that he had been forced to kill in self-defense, thereby preventing scheduled acts of murder meant to launch a local reign of terror.

By the date of his death, on August 18, 1986, Stephen Smith was already skating on thin ice as a guardian of law and order. In March, he had been indicted on charges of brutality stemming from the arrest of a shoplifting suspect on August 7, 1985. According to eyewitnesses, Smith had assaulted the 27-year-old subject without provocation, beating him to the ground, afterward brawling with bystanders who sought to intervene and help his victim. The incident was not Smith's first encounter with an allegation of excessive force; suspended after his indictment, by August 1986 he was a peace officer in name only.

Furious at his superiors for their "lack of support," Smith allegedly planned to assassinate Bexar County's district attorney, Sam Millsap, along with various high ranking members of the police department. A search of Smith's home, after his death, revealed an arsenal of eighteen pistols, five shotguns, six rifles, and at least 100,000 rounds of ammunition.

In retrospect, he was also suspected as the author of recent anonymous letters , mailed to newspapers and public officials, accusing department leaders of child molestation and other crimes.

Completely unhinged by the evening of August 17, 1986, Smith quarreled bitterly with his wife, and she called on a mutual friend, Patrolman Farrell Tucker, for help. Tucker visited Smith's apartment, where he was informed - by Smith's wife - of the murder schemes in progress. He was also told that Mrs. Smith had seen her husband, while off duty, beat and murder several persons he suspected of criminal activity.

(Smith was already suspect in the December 1982 slaying of Terrnell Folsom, gunned down by persons unknown while breaking into a parked car, but there was insufficient evidence for an indictment.)

On August 18, Tucker warned Smith's alleged targets of their potential danger. That night, wearing a concealed microphone and hidden pistol, Tucker met with Smith to hear his former partner's story. Rather than denying anything, Smith drew a .45 and threatened Tucker's life. Smith's momentary hesitation granted Tucker time to reach his gun, and five shots fired at point-blank range eliminated Smith as any kind of threat.

In retrospect, authorities believe that Stephen Smith was probably responsible for a 1983 sniper attack on the home of Deputy Police Chief Robert Heuck, as well as the 1985 firebombing of Police Chief Frank Hoyack's residence. Investigations are continuing in an attempt to trace the other victims mentioned by Smith's wife.

----------------
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/06/21/u...n-in-slaying-of-a-colleague.html?pagewanted=1
San Antonio Jury Clears Policeman in Slaying of a Colleague

AP

Published: June 21, 1987




SAN ANTONIO, June 20— A jury found a patrolman not guilty of murder Friday in the slaying of a fellow officer who was accused of being a vigilante and plotting to kill several officials.
The defendant, Farrell Tucker, who was standing, slumped into his chair and put his hands to his face when the verdict was pronounced. Relatives and friends stood and cheered.
The jury returned its verdict after five hours of deliberations in the death of Officer Stephen R. Smith, who had been a close friend to Mr. Tucker.
''I hold no aminosity toward anyone,'' Mr. Tucker said outside court. ''The jury was able to bring my life back.''
Mr. Tucker had been suspended from the force since his indictment last fall.
In their final arguments, prosecutors said Mr. Tucker, 36 years old, probably killed Officer Smith, 31, to save his own job. They linked the defendant as well as Mr. Smith to a letter vilifying top law-enforcement officers.
Mr. Tucker, who did not testify, had told the authorities he shot Officer Smith in self-defense. Mr. Tucker had reportedly been given a tape recorder in an effort to obtain evidence. Acts of Vigilantism
Officer Smith, who had been suspended by the department because of charges of brutality, had been linked to several acts of vigilantism and to three slayings.
The defense also said Officer Smith had planned to kill the assistant police chief, Frank Hoyack; the deputy chief, Robert Heuck, and the Bexar County District Attorney, Sam Millsap. Officer Smith blamed the three for ruining his career, the defense contended.
In a videotaped re-enactment of the shooting, Mr. Tucker gave this account: Officer Smith, while in his car, drew a 9-millimeter pistol on Mr. Tucker and forced him to give up his .45-caliber pistol. Mr. Smith put the 9-millimeter pistol under the driver's seat and Mr. Tucker then shot him five times with a .357-caliber revolver.
Bill Berchelmann, one of Mr. Tucker's attorneys, said the state had not proved its case.
The day after Officer Smith's shooting, investigators found about 30 pistols and rifles, several firebombs and about 50,000 rounds of ammunition at his apartment. One of the rifles was later linked ballistically to the shooting deaths of two men killed in 1985.
Officer Smith was also a suspect in the December 1982 shooting of Ternell Robert Folsom.
He was a suspect as well in the firebombings of Mr. Heuck's home in 1983 and Mr. Hoyack's home in 1986.


It was quite the scandal. The PD, DA, and others knew about the murders he carried out for months and let it slide...until he planned to target them. Even local newspapers knew it and were demanding an investigation, which they refused until after Smith's death. And three police chiefs resigned in a single year until finally one of them was willing to do more than stonewall.

There was also a terrible TV movie made about it at the time. Don't recall the title.
 
I Remembre a story back in the 70's of a Man who takes a sniper rifle to the top of buildings in New york and starts killing Criminals.

Every thing is ok as long as it is Bank Robbers, Muggers, etc. the Cops just go thru the motions
But when He shoots a Shoplifter, It turns out to be a off duty Policeman. And the Hunt goes into High Gear.
 
We already had this in San Antonio when I was a teenager.

All admirers of vigilantes, take a look at what the real thing looks like.

That is still not a vigilante. That was a police officer who targeted law enforcement officals which did no crime. If the officer in question focused his actions and rage just on criminals it would be different. Yet as those articles show he focused upon the DA, and police.
 
:confused: um, those aren't vigilantes, they're lynch mobs. Vigilantes are people who are not law enforcement, but take it upon themselves to go after criminals, outside the law. They specifically target criminals, not minorities or innocent bystanders. Vigilantes aren't any more legal than lynch mobs, but their targets are completely different.

Vigilantes don't go after criminals, they go after people who they see as criminals. That's an important distinction. Look up "vigilante justice" and you'll see "frontier justice" as an alternate term. You should also see that lynching is one of the premier features of frontier justice.

Actually, I should clarify. Vigilantes go against perceived wrongdoers, the criminal status of their victims is beside the point for the do-gooders (which is how vigilantes see themselves). After all, vigilantes have already decided that the law is inadequate, so why would they pay heed to legal definitions of criminality?
 
That is still not a vigilante. That was a police officer who targeted law enforcement officals which did no crime. If the officer in question focused his actions and rage just on criminals it would be different. Yet as those articles show he focused upon the DA, and police.

Apparently you didn't actually read the articles well, because you missed no less than five times they gave evidence of his viglilantism.

He killed or beat a number of accused criminals, even brutally beating a shoplifter and then beating bystanders.

Only later did he threaten the PD and DA.

Once again...

"A policeman turned homicidal vigilante in San Antonio, Texas, Stephen Smith was not exposed until his death, at the hands of a one-time friend and former patrol partner.

....In March, he had been indicted on charges of brutality stemming from the arrest of a shoplifting suspect on August 7, 1985. According to eyewitnesses, Smith had assaulted the 27-year-old subject without provocation, beating him to the ground, afterward brawling with bystanders who sought to intervene and help his victim.

.... Mrs. Smith had seen her husband, while off duty, beat and murder several persons he suspected of criminal activity.

----------------

....A jury found a patrolman not guilty of murder Friday in the slaying of a fellow officer who was accused of being a vigilante and plotting to kill several officials.

....Officer Smith...had been linked to several acts of vigilantism and to three slayings.
 
Last edited:
There is a vigilante. John Walsh, the host of America's Most Wanted. Think about it. His was son murdured in the early 1980s and Walsh used America's Most Wanted to search for his killer.

If the OP wanted a vigilante or vigilante movement that worked, ie not end quickly or badly, this might be a point to work with for a POD.

Perhaps build a reality show along the lines that includes more of going to pick up the bad guys themselves. Perhaps with P.I.s or freindly off duty law enforcement?:confused:

Actual citizen arrests, perhaps?
 
You know it occurrs to me that there is a lot of self defense in this country. Much of it unreported. This could be considered "taking the law into their own hands".

Especially with a little AH POD magic.:)
 
Top