Renzo mugging........

Discussion in 'Brazilian Jiu Jitsu' started by Dead_pool, Sep 7, 2012.

  1. mattt

    mattt Valued Member

    There are of course any number of anecdotes you can bring up on how mistakes occur and how power can be abused, but there are just as many for your plan on how to manage society.

    Ethics and morals from the inside should govern, not rules and frameworks from the outside. I think certain people can be trusted to make the right decision for the most part, and that doesn't mean because they have a badge.

    Society now is too litigious and is crumbling, I'd be happy to live in the days when your local copper smacked you for a petty crime rather than filled in paperwork and got his KPIs for the week.

    Teachers suspended for punishing an unruly child..the list goes on.

    Cops in NY making bogus arrests to make their numbers for the week.

    Not a society that I want to live in.
  2. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    It would have been ace if Renzo chased down the wrong man and it turned out to be Sakuraba visiting NY as a tourist.
    See how pleased with himself and willing to post after pictures Renzo would be then. :)
  3. mattt

    mattt Valued Member

    I'm not a gynocologist but I'll take a look.
  4. Kuma

    Kuma Lurking about

    I cannot agree any more strongly with Janno's posts. As soon as Renzo went from defending himself to actively engaging in the pursuit and assault of those who allegedly attempted to rob him he engaged in criminal behavior. Plain and simple. Dumb to do but even dumber to brag about. It's incidents like these that show not every martial artist is well-schooled in the legal ramifications of what they do and teach. And that is a huge problem if you are claiming to teach self protection.
  5. boards

    boards Its all in the reflexes!

    Is it legal for someone to chase them down (assuming they both were involved in mugging him) and submit them without going over the top in the interests of holding them for the police to arrest?
  6. Oddsbodskins

    Oddsbodskins Troll hunter 2nd Class

    Obviously dependent on your area of residence, but I think it would be extremely difficult to claim a citizens arrest after the event.
  7. Late for dinner

    Late for dinner Valued Member

    Just an aside, I have had a patient that was caught by 5 guys who mistook him for a guy they had wanted to make an example of. He was the wrong guy but they would not believe it. Four of them held him down while the fifth kicked his teeth in. Oddly the police did nothing to them when they came in the next day and turned themselves in when they discovered their error. The judge did not seem to do enough either as they were given fines and community service. The patient has had to go through multiple dental reconstructions and has had to sue in civil court to get his costs covered (still waiting on this).

    The question is, should the aggrieved patient get a load of his mates out and find these guys one at a time and do the same to them? If vigilante justice is ok for some, then where do you stop? The point to having a legal system is supposed to be to avoid all this nonsense in the first place.

    I might have sympathy for Renzo and what he was trying to do but if he mistakenly got an innocent guy , or even worse caused one of the guys to be severely injured or die (remember the guy who died after the police officer pushed him with his baton in the riots here in London) then where would one's sympathies lie?

    People should respect the law of the land they live in irrespective of what they would do back home.

    Last edited: Sep 11, 2012
  8. Kuma

    Kuma Lurking about

    Though legal it's very foolhardy. Be a good witness to the police, not a dead wannabe hero.
  9. roninmaster

    roninmaster be like water

    i'm sorry but I'm very biased when it comes to the subject of citizens handling crimes. i live in one of the top 10 most dangerous cities in the U.S. and have seen with my own eyes crimes unfold in bad neighborhoods and ghetto's to which police happened to be blissfully unavailable until quite some time had passed away, if and when help did arrive it was usually a very underwhelming response due to what I hope is low levels of law enforcement and to a relatively poor city.

    therefor, If the people put in place in the situation aren't fulfilling there duties to an adequate level by the people they're suppose to protect, not some stupid quota of the month, I don't have problems with the citizens doing the job for them. As mattt said, when this perfect society exists like that of the "Judge dread" comics and their is adequate police support and help regardless of how rich your neighborhood is then I will feel like vigilanti justice holds no weight in our society.

    how would the police have handled it differently? they would have searched the local area, found someone matching the description, and taken him down on sight. especially the cop who witnessed it( renzo in this case) found the suspect. except there probably would have been a taze involved. renzo just did the job of a couple people.

    you can bring up all the stories about when people "get the wrong guy" just as easily as I can bring up stories and video recorded evidence of police abusing their authority and beating civilians waaay past the point of compliance, even if said civilian was not a suspect in the crime. in fact i will.

    this is what happens in this lawfully governed society, by many of the people who have the badges. Why should renzo or anyone else be any different. least he got the people who did something.

    I know i'm speaking from age and experience not the best logic, I'm not speaking from dislike of police force, as i know and train with many amazing police officials who actively attempt to do the right thing.

    but seeing people go free due to holes in our "oh so great" justice system burns me up. people getting off free because someone didn't sign the correct part of search warrant is BS. I also don't agree with this mindset of just because its against the law means we shouldn't do it in our society, seeing as there was a point where sitting in the white only section of a restaurant was against the law too. laws are only made to preserve order, and if those said laws are not doing that or are doing the exact opposite ( some would say pot laws) then those laws should either be changed or removed.

    as mentioned would renzo's actions been more accepted had he been accompanied by phoenix jones

    [ame=""]Real superhero Phoenix Jones makes citizens arrest - YouTube[/ame]

    but now i'm just playing devils' advocate.

    i'm probably going to get a tongue lashing for this, and in 20 years I might think differently, but 21 college fratboy roninmaster90 thinks this way at the moment.

    edit: If its not obvious by now, Boondocks saints is one of my favorite movies.
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2012
  10. 6footgeek

    6footgeek Meow

    Eeesh. one thing is for certain. despite what we think here is right or wrong. all he's done is provide all the evidence needed for a one sided law suit. which should happen i believe. A lot of people think of this guy as an idol. and i can understand and fully support his stories of fights happening back in ghettos of brazil. but this stunt here probably negatively affected a whole lot of UFC crazed teens.
    heck, if i was still a bullied teen, i'd read this and be inspired. probably learn a few bjj moves and try to take on my bullies, get beat up, or worse get expelled.

    Don't get me wrong, i'm all for vigilante justice. but this was like torturing these people. After this, these two might become straight arrows, fat chance for that though *whens the last time you heard that a person changed his vies from a beating?* , or they'll start carrying weapons. and the psychological trauma they got here will make sure these people end up USING these weapons.

    Plus a trend that goes on here and probably in more dangerous areas of the states is that experienced criminals like to reattempt failed robberies after a while. with weapons and more people. So Renzo may be lucky if these guys don't decide on chasing him with a gun later on.
  11. Kuma

    Kuma Lurking about

    No citizen should be encouraged to engage in vigilantism unless it is to protect themselves or another. "Teaching them a lesson" certainly is not a good idea. If this was true then Renzo got very lucky. High level MAist or not you can always get killed. Alex Gong chased down a car that struck his and fled, then was shot and killed for his trouble. Renzo was lucky he did not experience the same fate.
  12. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    As I see it fighting off someone that just wanted $20 is a different situation to fighting someone you've chased down, cornered and then attacked.
    The mugger's far more likely to fight harder (and use more force) to protect himself than to take a wallet IMHO.
  13. Kuma

    Kuma Lurking about

    You would be correct. And because nothing was ever reported if Renzo did jump the second guy and get smoked for his troubles, there's the possibility the second alleged robber would be able to successfully claim self defense as now HE would technically be the victim.
  14. Janno

    Janno Valued Member

    Maybe not a tongue-lashing, but i feel very strongly about the points you've raised. I recently came back from a 2-month contract in a place where, although they have plenty of police, the system is totally corrupt. The police are lazy, inept, uneducated, and make their money through extortion and bribes. And i had to work with these people. For all your complaints about how things are in your country (rough neighbourhoods, slow response times, quotas, etc...) let me tell you that until you've experienced life outside of a "developed" nation, you really don't know how good you've got it. Like you, i had a lot of complaints about the system and how broken it was. But then i started travelling to places where the system was really broken. And yes, vigilante/revenge killings do happen as a consequence in these places.

    Take a step further into places that have no rule of law whatsoever. Places in Asia and Africa where the infrastructure is totally destroyed and the people are governed by rule of force. It is a horrible place to be. America is a long way away from this, and even though the system is not without its problems, and its guardians are not without their faults, i would still say that it is a world-leader in quality of life.

    What you're essentially saying is that it's ok to do whatever you want as long as it's justified, and it's happening to bad people.

    But what is an acceptable level of justification?

    And how do you define a "bad person?"

    We all justify our actions - regardless of whether they're right or wrong (like i said before, it's only a matter of perspective). If we couldn't justify the things we did, we wouldn't be able to sleep at night! But what if my actions were detrimental to others? Just because i can argue my case, doesn't make it right. For instance, a lot of people illegally download music - justifying it on the basis that the industry has enough money already. It is still stealing though. Now, if i choose to run a red light because i was in a hurry, or if i choose to rob a man because i feel i need the money more than he does, or if i choose to assault a man because his attitude is offensive to me, we are going to find ourselves with some dilemmas, are we not?

    With this in mind, i could take the point of view that, as Renzo Gracie has shown himself to be a violent, ego-driven lawbreaker, the only way to ensure that he doesn't continue on his self-righteous rampage would be to kill him before he harms anyone else. Maybe the lad that he jumped has got friends/family who are honour-bound to avenge him (after all, he didn't even touch Mr Gracie, but Mr Gracie has beaten him up and left him unconscious in the street!). Now we have escalation.

    The fact is that without adherence to the law, the only thing that is left is rule of force, which you are trying to champion at the moment. Believe it or not, there are laws that allow you to protect yourself and your property. They even allow you to protect the lives and property of others around you. However, going out on search and destroy missions against people you have a vendetta against is where the line is drawn. With very good reason (see above): To ignore this line is to descend into chaos, where the ones with the biggest gangs and the most guns make the rules. Your neighbourhood might be "rough," but it is nothing compared to Darfur or any number of other hell-holes like it.

    Here's the bottom line: Either choose to live in a society governed by law (with all its imperfections and imbalances), or choose to live in a society governed by force. But if you choose the former, just be aware that it will not work if you simply pick and choose which laws are active at your own personal convenience. Like Renzo Gracie does.
  15. Llamageddon

    Llamageddon MAP's weird cousin Supporter

    No, sorry - as a mod I'm not having this. The above post is far too eloquent and sophisticated for MAP.
  16. mattt

    mattt Valued Member

    There are different perspectives, and extremes to everything. What you are using here is an example of the most extreme lawless society with high levels of corruption and abuse compared to a moderate example of lands governed by the rule of law.

    Therefore your argument is biased and unbalanced.

    The truth is that there are opportunities for corruption everywhere there is a human enforcing law, whether that law be a basic moral law in an uncivilized village in africa, or a developed city law, state law, federal law or international law.

    The concept that a globalized legal system enforced by physical and financial penalties is any less subject to abuse is any more divine than implementation at a local level is fallacious. The entire Legal Industry is built upon people who seek, for financial recompense, to exploit the law on behalf of their clients.

    Values, Morals and Ethics are not learnt by the enforcement of globalized legislation to control a society, they are learnt by understanding right from wrong, and taking action based upon that for the benefit of the community.

    The shift in thinking now is that a homogeneous solution will fix all problems, and that one central concept will be the best way to govern, feed and educate our society, however this is already proving to be strewn with problems.

    Local thinking, local acting, society with proper moral standards is a far more healthy environment, and frankly one I find at odds with the system that you are advocating.
  17. Llamageddon

    Llamageddon MAP's weird cousin Supporter

    I'm going to ask a question as objectively as possible. Please don't read anything in to it.

    For those who have defended/are defending Renzo, why are you doing so? Is it because you absolutely truly believe in such a form of justice (however defined) and think he did the morally/socially right thing, or because you look up to him and don't want him to be wrong?
  18. mattt

    mattt Valued Member

    If that truly is an objective question does my answer have to be one of the two situations that you have defined as possible answers?

    For me, I truly believe that locally managed justice is a viable solution, it clearly has potential for exploitation but no more than any other system. The key factor in the advocacy of such a system is that the person involved must be trustworthy. In my case I believe Renzo to be trustworthy.
  19. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    I believe him not to be.
    Don't get me wrong. He seems a very genuine and happy go lucky guy that is always smiling but he's also a hot headed and proud brazilian used to dishing out physcial violence and upholding the fighting honour of his family.

    As someone watching my back if I needed it? He'd be near the top of the tree.
    As someone given the power to hand out ad-hoc justice? Yeah not so much.

    So where does that leave us?
  20. Llamageddon

    Llamageddon MAP's weird cousin Supporter

    I take your point, to an extent. My second question would be how do you know Renzo is trustworthy? Do you know him personally? Can he still be seen to be a valorous individual when he has used what is obviously excessive force?

    And to get technical, if 'locally managed justice' were to be viable, it would have to be administered by an accountable institution, such as national or local government.

    Furthermore, is this really just? What we have is one person's word against another's. No arbiter here, no jury of peers - the victim immediately became judge, jury and 'executioner' (for want of a better word). In my mind justice can not be immediately administered by the victim - that is revenge or retribution. Justice also suggests a proportional response to provide social, political or economic equilibrium. This wasn't that. Finally, justice by necessity comes from an objective party (notwithstanding court and economic bias etc), precisely because both the victim and accused can not be trusted to give an objective account of what happened, even if that is what they think they are doing.

    I know this is basically a summary of the arguments already laid out in the thread, but it seemed relevant to repost them.

Share This Page