you just compared preventative defense, to revenge vigilantism.
what a tool
you are allowed to prevent yourself from becoming a victim.
you are not allowed to commit additional crimes once one had just happened to you. that dosnt make it ok.
He caught the man in the act, and acted in defense of his son who could not possibly be expected to defend himself in the situation. He didn't hunt the man down after he found out afterwards, which would be vigilantism: he walked in on this assault happening. Calling the police or putting up a sign is not preventative defense, either, and was a metaphor for the bystander-ish attitude of saying that a man should not be responsible for the immediate safety of his children, whether or not it comes to physical violence, specifically because someone thinks it's wrong to inflict bodily harm.
Here's a link to the Florida statutes on "justifiable use of force". I don't agree that the law is the end-all and be-all, but by law this man was within his rights as a citizen of Florida.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.htmlAn especially interesting section, under "Use or threatened use of force in defense of person."
(1) A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.
(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.
I really don't think i need to explain the semicolon
You're ready for law school now!
