You can watch the scene here, if you like.
The thing is, this scene takes place in what was at the time the Indian Territory; the men carrying out the executions are former Texas Rangers. So they're not only not in Texas, they're not still Rangers. The territory wasn't subject to Texas law or any state law at the time, and they had no Federal authority former or present. This is pure vigilante justice, without any sort of due process, in which they indulge to such a degree as to kill another fellow former Ranger who didn't himself kill anyone.
It's a very dodgy example to hang much of a lesson on. A powerful scene, which Lonesome Dove contains in spades, but I'm not sure how good a moral or ethical example this really is.
3 comments:
Yes- dodgy if there was a chance of actual judicial exercise.
But if there is no structure of law, then who is to make law, but men?
Maybe it comes down to imperfect law, or no law at all.
Well, there’s definitely no -law- going on there.
I’m perfectly fine with the absence of law. I’m not a fan of using coercion in general, but it’s understandable that you can’t have man-burning murderers about. Maybe it’s necessary hygiene, but justice? That’s a stretch, and not just of a few necks.
I don't see how you say "no law". Clearly they have their rules, which they are enforcing, and they, and he seem to think he also understood the rules- so it's some kind of law- not formal, not governmental, but law need not come from governments formally, does it?
Post a Comment