> > With all the talk about how hackers or one hacker has done so much damage lately, I was wondering about a justified hack. Last night on Dateline or 20/20, I forget which one, they had a story about women in hate groups like KKK and WAR and the Westboro Church. All these people are on the web.
> > I would be all for it if these idiots got hacked and taken down for a long time. Hatred has no place in our society. I think we all realize that.
> > But I know that all the publicity from a hack would just bring more people to their sites. So, what is the answer?
>
> Don't jeopardize your civil rights by imposing on theirs. You're absolutely right: hatred has no place in our society. Nor do restrictions on our freedom of speech. If you're only free to speak if you say the right things, you're not free at all.

Hey, that sounds like something *I'd* say! ;-}

> Plus, as you say, it just gains them publicity anyway, so not only is it a violation of civil rights, it doesn't work anyway.
>
> The solution is to do one's part to be a positive part of the society you are in, working with others to build non-threatening and compassionate environments: not to attack those who aren't doing the same, however reprehensible they might be.

Anyhow, in all seriousness, I agree with everything Sam said. Ever hear the expression "two wrongs don't make a right?" Well, it's true, and this is what it was talking about. Doing wrong to someone just because he is doing wrong does not make you justified.

Modern society has a habit of denying that; how many movies do you see, for example, that glorify and heroize "vigilante" types who inflict suffering on the "bad guys," or who track down people who are doing bad things and do the same things to them? The message given here is "doing wrong is okay as long as you do it to bad people." That is morally reprehensible on top of being contradictory.

Here's a hint: don't judge people. It is not your place to carry out punishments upon people just because you find what they are doing to be wrong.