Do the ends justify the means? Can I break one law to uphold another law? Can I assume I am above the laws and rights to privacy of one group of people in order to bring to justice another group of people? Can I use evidence obtained illegally to solve a crime or an injustice? Do I have the right to use terrorism (threats, coercion, extortion) to uphold the rights of those I feel have been harmed by the actions of another? Can I define justice to suit my actions?
Most if not all of us would say no. And then in the next set of sentences we applaud the efforts of an anonymous group of vigilante terrorists whose trademark is the breaking of laws to uphold laws. In the recent situation with the facebook group that posted misogynist comments about female students, the vigilante group Anonymous threatened to expose the names of the facebook group members if justice was not meted out to their satisfaction. The question of guilt concerning the men in question is not an issue. What they did was wrong. But what Anonymous did was also wrong.
A secret facebook group means that no one who is not a member of the group has access to the group. If Anonymous has access to the names of the group members then they came by that information illegally. They are not a police force. Granted, those they expose are guilty of their crimes. But if Anonymous protects us from the criminals, who protects us from Anonymous?
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments must be approved by the moderator. If you do not have a Google account, choose Anonymous.