(hypothetically) if there was a situation where the state sides with the terrorists or doesn't take action against them, do you think vigilante justice is morally justifiable?
Vigilante justice is only as good as the people who are carrying it out. I think the key here is accountability. Like a self regulated militia, as opposed to loosely connected groups of angry people. I'm a little confused in the context of preemptive violence however. 'Terrorists' kinda imply violence to begin with, so is it really preemptive violence at that point?
I mean in a perfect world I'd prefer it if there were a way to petition the government without resorting to anything extreme