> Utter nonsense and a misuse of English which lower the grade oif a
> high-school theme at least one whole grade. A real abuse of language and
> a deliberate confusion of categories.
Not at all, not in this context. Any time a person uses a firearm in an attempt to defend themselves or others in an isolated incident is of course clearly identifiable as self-defense. That doesn't mean it isn't also an example of vigilantism in practice. Self-defense, itself, is an act (often a reaction) one takes in a brief moment when one perceives danger. Taking deliberative steps to ensure one is maximally prepared in the event an as yet unidentifable danger arises is not self-defense: it is vigilantism. Obtaining a concealed carry permit in anticipation of thwarting crime is a form of vigilantism. The entire concealed-carry movement is a vigilante movement, which is why it should be no surprise the movement is probably strongest in the South. (The Northwest, more surprisingly, endorsed the movement about as quickly. For a quick visual of the progression of concealed carry laws, see: http://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php.) Take, for example, the title of this paper from the Cato Institute: Fighting Back: Crime, Self-Defense and the Right to Carry a Handgun (http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-284.html). If "fighting back" doesn't convey vigilantism, I'm not sure what does. The discussion that was being had was about the benefits of having an armed citizenry as a proactive force for the prevention of and protection from crime. That's vigilantism. If you think it's not, you're the one abusing the language. The word is not so narrow as to contain only post-crime, extrajudicial hangings and the like. The concealed carry movement, like the Minutemen movement, fits comfortably within it. It is what it is. Although I don't like the movement, describing it as what it is--vigilantism--and its adherents as what they are--vigilantes--casts no judgment per se. For my part, I just find it incredibly depressing that we have such a successful mass movement not to help protect anybody from the rich and powerful but to literally fend off the poor and often mentally ill.