Sometimes you have to play dirty to get justice. T or F?

[Luna Tick]

Sometimes you have to play dirty to get justice. T or F?

Feel free to elaborate. Do you feel it's justified to do things that in other circumstances would be seen as unethical if it means justice prevails in the end?

 

[CrusaderRabbit08]

False.....

 

[Slartibartfast]

The whole reason for stuff like due process and the fifth amendment is the idea that the proper administration of justice requires respecting the accused. I think this principal applies universally, even to terrorists or enemy combatants or whatever you wish to call them.

 

[mikhail]

Well i think the truth is sometimes you dont get justice and there is nothing you can do about it.

 

[The Mark]

Sometimes you have to play dirty to get justice. T or F?

Feel free to elaborate. Do you feel it's justified to do things that in other circumstances would be seen as unethical if it means justice prevails in the end?

False.

If you have to play dirty, you are using unjust means to get justice.

And....You get the point.

 

[Befuddled_Stoner]

Justice is nothing more than the desire to take revenge leavened with a concern for social proprieties. Playing dirty eschews those ideals of how a just society should operate and leaves nothing behind but the revenge. You can never get justice by playing dirty because playing clean is an intrinsic element of justice.

On a side note, I believe that the justness of our justice has been so diluted that we should be very careful about letting anyone water it down any further.

 

[Catawba]

Sometimes you have to play dirty to get justice. T or F?

False...........

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Sometimes you have to play dirty to get justice. T or F?

Feel free to elaborate. Do you feel it's justified to do things that in other circumstances would be seen as unethical if it means justice prevails in the end?

Absolutely.

 

[Luna Tick]

This has been a really good thread thus far. Thanks for all the intelligent and well thought out responses.

 

[RightinNYC]

What you see as justice may differ from what I see. So long as the end goal is subjective, the only way we can maintain any sort of standard is to enforce objective rules of conduct.

 

[rathi]

I'd say the place where you are matters. The U.S. has a reasonably fair legal system and the rule of law, something that doesn't apply everywhere. I'd say justice may occur on a personal scale outside the law, but as a society it should not be considered acceptable. If is important to uphold the rule of law, even knowing it sometimes fails, over the desire of a single person. It is hardly fair, but much better than the alternative.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

The law is the law, and in order for the law to maintain its integrity it must be enforced even-handedly. Using "dirty tricks" to get justice-- which is a wholly subjective concept-- means violating this principle. This is bad enough when civilians feel it necessary to do so, but when the people whose professional responsibility is to uphold the law do so, all pretense of civilization and order is lost.

I'm often outspoken in my support for vigilantism, but this principle is tempered with the belief that the criminal justice system should and must do everything within its lawful authority to prosecute offenders-- even those offenders who have acted in the pursuit of justice.

 

[Orion]

I think the justice system is fraught with injustice even when it plays by the rules, so the OP question is kind of redundant.

 

[The Mark]

I think the justice system is fraught with injustice even when it plays by the rules, so the OP question is kind of redundant.

Which current laws/rules do you consider unjust?