[GigabyteCoin]

>amazed that we don't see more retaliatory murders when the legal system fails, considering how easy it is to get a gun in most of these states

You're amazed that most Americans do not resort to murder when the legal system fails them?

That's why we have appeals courts. To appeal decisions by judges that you believe have failed you.

Where do you come from if you don't mind my asking?

[guelo]

The appeals courts and all other levels of government failed these people for years until a newspaper finally took interest.

[GigabyteCoin]

The right answer to those failures should never be murder.

The right answer to those failures is to pressure the system to change, as this newspaper article is helping to do.

[lovich]

Not for nothing, but the US was founded on the basis that violence is just in the face of an unjust government. We can't idolize the Revolutionary War, and then turn around and tell people they should always follow the law no matter what.

If we are going to assume that the government is always right and there is no reason for violence ever, then we should just do away with the second amendment. I dont think that amendment is super useful in the age of tanks, jets and nukes, but the idea of violent revolt against unjust rule is still there

[TeMPOraL]

> The right answer to those failures should never be murder.

I agree. In this particular case though, I wouldn't blame the victim if they'd consider kneecapping a proportionate response.

Preying on the weak like that is deeply, deeply subhuman.

[FussyZeus]

If this sort of thing was tried before a court system, the person would've ended up in a hole.

That's why we created a justice system, because that mode of justice is not a good thing.

The justice system failed them, so logically, they'd be forced to go back to putting people in holes.

[lightedman]

"The right answer to those failures should never be murder."

Many many years ago, a jury in Tennessee disagreed with your first claim, and literally took the law into their own hands in the courtroom against the government as they watched a persons rights get wholesale violated. That jury was flat-out exonerated IIRC. So there's legal precedent against your first claim and a good inherent pressure for your second claim. People would be far less likely to violate the law so egregiously if they knew that people could just kill them and walk away without a second thought of jail time.

[ryandrake]

That's a pretty naive point of view. Obviously the courts are part of the system that enables success from this profit-seeking behaviour. How are they going to help? Everyone from the scammers to the judges to the lawmaker who wrote the laws is probably on the $$$ gravy train.