Criminals are of many kinds. The borderline first-time offender with pricking conscience may find himself at crossroads. But habitual offenders are those who no longer are ashamed of their criminal ways. They don't carry a guilt and it helps them pre-plan and execute crime without an iota of hesitation.
Hardcore criminals are those who openly commit a crime undeterred by legal consequences such as arrests and conviction. There are also nuanced criminals, who, as and when they find the grip of constitution and law enforcement agencies getting tighter, find diplomatic and deceitful ways to hide their criminal identities, and project an alluring social image to trap their victims.
In our society, there are many such skilled offenders who move around with a well-crafted, pitch and picture perfect personality, but venomous blood could be running deep through every vein of their body. They escape even the radar of crime detection. They wrest control of a victim's moral, sociological and psychological self, extract everything they need, and as their intentions come to light turn the moral compass against the victim. With the lack of evidence and witnesses who could speak a word against them, they move around unscathed by any allegation. They also remain constantly shielded by their partners in crime and by a flock of ignorant loyalists (the would-be victims), who see their criminal masters as victims of a false propaganda and real victims as aggressors.
Ideally, laws are meant to challenge any act that is criminally offensive. But, today the same laws keep people dependent and restricted. They provide an ineffective law enforcement and justice rendering system as an alternative to safeguard oneself and one's property. This ineffectiveness of the system provides safe hideouts for criminals within the periphery of law. They survive in them unexposed. And only those who use brute force in a spurt of the moment crime or uncontrolled rage get exposed. Rest of the crimes remain as invisible acts.
A number of victims choose to hush up crime inflicted upon them as they may lack the financial support required to take the case to a fair conclusion. They may also feel discouraged for want of clinching evidence. Nevertheless, the biggest dampener is the process of justice itself, which remains plagued by exceptional lapses and extraordinary delays. At the end of the battle, victims may find law as a twin edged sword slitting their own hands. Criminals, in the meantime, would have found ways to escape conviction and punishment with the aid of an expert legal support or by bribing authorities in the law enforcement and judicial system, and their higher ups in the political power structure. We know that in our country getting justice isn't an easy process. It can consume any sane man's patience. Perhaps for the rich and powerful, it may be a purchasable commodity.
Now, as long as justice gets delayed, offenders would remain free and ever more emboldened to harass victims and find new victims. On the other hand, if justice is served immediately or without much delay, offenders would know that they can't escape the stringent laws of justice. It will instill a sense of fear in them and a sense of security among people.
It's needless to say that for such a flawless delivery of justice to happen the entire system of law enforcement and judiciary should work exceptionally efficient and totally free from corruption. That may be an ideal system far from current realities. But until such a system and constitution is in place what should people do? Should they let themselves become victims?
Are we supposed to sit and wait for a state force while damage to our lives and property is been caused and thereafter bend before compromised individuals in various levels of state mechanism (political, administration and judiciary) to pursue an almost never-ending process of justice until the fag end of life, just to get some consolatory justice, and frugal currencies as compensation for incalculable losses?
Now, either the democratic state mechanism of justice should own up complete responsibility of the safety of its citizens, or it should divulge the powers to its people to actively defend themselves. Laws must be constituted to allow citizens to stand up against any form of offense to deter it with all strength. It's a birthright of every free individual to defend oneself and one's people from the malicious intent of others.
In a society where people are not vulnerable, criminals will find it harder to enact crime. One may argue that such laws of self-defense could be misused. Aren't every other law getting misused? We see loopholes in the constitution being used by private attorneys to save criminals. Whereas, laws that bestow power in the hands of people will also empower every honest individual in the society. It may pit citizens and criminals against each other, but it will also prevent crime and tame the criminals.
Today majority of citizens are timid, tied down and unfit to defend themselves, due to over dependence on a still evolving judicial superstructure. What difference would justice make to an individual who is no longer alive or left brutally assaulted? Should we not be capable of protecting ourselves before we become victims of a crime?
The bottom line is when survival is at stake we should be ready to defend ourselves. It's a legitimate right when set free can challenge the wrong in the society. Stronger laws of self-defense will empower citizens to take criminals head on and save themselves. With that, covert wars of crime, which are being played using the inefficiency of the system may come to an end and a stronger and upright society may evolve.
Hardcore criminals are those who openly commit a crime undeterred by legal consequences such as arrests and conviction. There are also nuanced criminals, who, as and when they find the grip of constitution and law enforcement agencies getting tighter, find diplomatic and deceitful ways to hide their criminal identities, and project an alluring social image to trap their victims.
In our society, there are many such skilled offenders who move around with a well-crafted, pitch and picture perfect personality, but venomous blood could be running deep through every vein of their body. They escape even the radar of crime detection. They wrest control of a victim's moral, sociological and psychological self, extract everything they need, and as their intentions come to light turn the moral compass against the victim. With the lack of evidence and witnesses who could speak a word against them, they move around unscathed by any allegation. They also remain constantly shielded by their partners in crime and by a flock of ignorant loyalists (the would-be victims), who see their criminal masters as victims of a false propaganda and real victims as aggressors.
Ideally, laws are meant to challenge any act that is criminally offensive. But, today the same laws keep people dependent and restricted. They provide an ineffective law enforcement and justice rendering system as an alternative to safeguard oneself and one's property. This ineffectiveness of the system provides safe hideouts for criminals within the periphery of law. They survive in them unexposed. And only those who use brute force in a spurt of the moment crime or uncontrolled rage get exposed. Rest of the crimes remain as invisible acts.
A number of victims choose to hush up crime inflicted upon them as they may lack the financial support required to take the case to a fair conclusion. They may also feel discouraged for want of clinching evidence. Nevertheless, the biggest dampener is the process of justice itself, which remains plagued by exceptional lapses and extraordinary delays. At the end of the battle, victims may find law as a twin edged sword slitting their own hands. Criminals, in the meantime, would have found ways to escape conviction and punishment with the aid of an expert legal support or by bribing authorities in the law enforcement and judicial system, and their higher ups in the political power structure. We know that in our country getting justice isn't an easy process. It can consume any sane man's patience. Perhaps for the rich and powerful, it may be a purchasable commodity.
Now, as long as justice gets delayed, offenders would remain free and ever more emboldened to harass victims and find new victims. On the other hand, if justice is served immediately or without much delay, offenders would know that they can't escape the stringent laws of justice. It will instill a sense of fear in them and a sense of security among people.
It's needless to say that for such a flawless delivery of justice to happen the entire system of law enforcement and judiciary should work exceptionally efficient and totally free from corruption. That may be an ideal system far from current realities. But until such a system and constitution is in place what should people do? Should they let themselves become victims?
Are we supposed to sit and wait for a state force while damage to our lives and property is been caused and thereafter bend before compromised individuals in various levels of state mechanism (political, administration and judiciary) to pursue an almost never-ending process of justice until the fag end of life, just to get some consolatory justice, and frugal currencies as compensation for incalculable losses?
Now, either the democratic state mechanism of justice should own up complete responsibility of the safety of its citizens, or it should divulge the powers to its people to actively defend themselves. Laws must be constituted to allow citizens to stand up against any form of offense to deter it with all strength. It's a birthright of every free individual to defend oneself and one's people from the malicious intent of others.
In a society where people are not vulnerable, criminals will find it harder to enact crime. One may argue that such laws of self-defense could be misused. Aren't every other law getting misused? We see loopholes in the constitution being used by private attorneys to save criminals. Whereas, laws that bestow power in the hands of people will also empower every honest individual in the society. It may pit citizens and criminals against each other, but it will also prevent crime and tame the criminals.
Today majority of citizens are timid, tied down and unfit to defend themselves, due to over dependence on a still evolving judicial superstructure. What difference would justice make to an individual who is no longer alive or left brutally assaulted? Should we not be capable of protecting ourselves before we become victims of a crime?
The bottom line is when survival is at stake we should be ready to defend ourselves. It's a legitimate right when set free can challenge the wrong in the society. Stronger laws of self-defense will empower citizens to take criminals head on and save themselves. With that, covert wars of crime, which are being played using the inefficiency of the system may come to an end and a stronger and upright society may evolve.