I'd prefer to separate the emotive issue of a little cocksucker beating his cat, from the potential dangers of the kind of 'virtual vigilantism' which his actions 'incurred.'

I think what is dangerous, is that the retribution does gratify one instinctively. That's the first reaction. So groups like this, can appeal to 'the common man' who is fucked off at his own shit lot/genereal shit in the world, in that they appear to be rebelling against a flaccid and corrupt establishment, by fighting the good fight on our behalf. There is a drama and romance in this. Illustrated by plenty of stories and pop myths.

But what's the truth behind the motivation of any vigilante? A frustrated worker for good, who cut's to the chase and does what needs to be done? Or someone who gets a gratifying buzz out of using the 'moral highground' in outing the 'bad guy' or 'supporting the underdog', to legitimise their own repressed sadistic dominator drives?

I do not know what woud motivate someone to become involved in 'arbitrary' causes, unless they had a pretty dodgey impulse to cause grief or weild some kind of power over others, which was supported by some exceedingly loose ethical appeals to 'justice'.

In short, there are a lot of furry animals out there being abused every day, by all kinds of cocksuckers. I don't believe retribution of the kind this group brought about will aid the causes of any of these creatures. And I do suspect the possibel hidden power junkie motives of any form of non-personal or at least non-cause based vigelantism.