Bounty-hunters-wrong livelihood? Or a good job?

[Ben]

Hi Dhammakid

Yes, anyone can start a thread in appreciation of the work of social workers, no problem!
I don't recall the Buddha advising against the use of weapons, per se. In SN42.3 the Buddha did detail what happened to those warriors killed in battle who were 'striving & exerting themselves in battle believing that in doing so would land them a place amongst the devas'. The sutta links the action of killing and view with the destination of a warrior killed in battle:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Sometimes in life we have to make some pretty hard decisions, and if we have to use force to neutralise someone's intention to harm himself or others, and if that force is used wisely and compassionately, then I see no problem. In life we are often confronted with choices that are morally murky. We can be guided by the precepts and the Dhamma, but sometimes we will have to rely on our own wisdom. Fortunately, by studying the texts, through bhavana (mental cultivation/meditation), and no small measure of common sense, we can navigate some of life's morally difficult decisions.
Kind regards

Ben

[appicchato]

May I ask you what you think about bounty hunting- wrong or right livelyhood, or is this a borderline case?

Hi Annabel,

Haven't seen the Dog...except in the news a couple of times...

And to answer your question, I don't really have a view on this one...it is what it is, and I haven't seen any benefit (yet) in pondering the pros and cons of it...

Be well...

[stuka]

All of the silly monkey-chatter aside, let's take a look at just who and what this "Dog" fellow is:

Duane Chapman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Duane Lee "Dog" Chapman
Born February 2, 1953 (1953-02-02) (age 55)
Denver, Colorado
Occupation Bounty hunter, television personality
Spouse(s) La Fonda Sue Honeycutt (1972-1977)
Anne M. Tegnell (1979-?)
Lyssa Rae Brittian (1982-1991)
Tawny Marie ?-1994
Beth Smith 2006-present
Children 11, including Duane Lee Chapman, II and Leland Chapman
Website
Official Website

Duane Lee "Dog" Chapman (born February 2, 1953 in Denver, Colorado [1]) is an American bounty hunter and bail bondsman who lives in Honolulu, Hawaii. He stars in Dog the Bounty Hunter, a weekly reality television program which is broadcast on the A&E Network (USA), Virgin 1 (both UK), Bravo, and FOX8/Nine Network (Australia) .

Chapman, a former gang member with 18 prior convictions for armed robbery,[2] was sentenced in Pampa, Texas to a five year prison term in 1977 after being convicted of the first degree murder of Jerry Oliver. Chapman maintains his innocence of murder but suggests he was a legal accessory for not reporting the shooting to the police. He was released on probation after 1 and a half years.[3]

Dog's career in bounty hunting began when he was in court disputing child support. When he told the judge he did not have the money to pay, the judge offered him a deal to bring in a fugitive in exchange for the judge to pay part of Chapman's child support [4] for Duane Lee and Leland Chapman.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings stuka,

Well, for Dog it looks as if being a bounty hunter is "Improved" livelihood, whether or not it's classified as "Right" or "Wrong".

Metta,
Retro.

[Will]

Seems a futile exercise to try and judge the right livelihood of the job of bounty hunting with only one bounty hunter for a data point.

[Dhammakid]

Hi Dhammakid

Yes, anyone can start a thread in appreciation of the work of social workers, no problem!
I don't recall the Buddha advising against the use of weapons, per se. In SN42.3 the Buddha did detail what happened to those warriors killed in battle who were 'striving & exerting themselves in battle believing that in doing so would land them a place amongst the devas'. The sutta links the action of killing and view with the destination of a warrior killed in battle:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Sometimes in life we have to make some pretty hard decisions, and if we have to use force to neutralise someone's intention to harm himself or others, and if that force is used wisely and compassionately, then I see no problem. In life we are often confronted with choices that are morally murky. We can be guided by the precepts and the Dhamma, but sometimes we will have to rely on our own wisdom. Fortunately, by studying the texts, through bhavana (mental cultivation/meditation), and no small measure of common sense, we can navigate some of life's morally difficult decisions.
Kind regards

Ben

Thanks very much Ben for the clarification and valuable insight. I pretty much agree with you.

[Dhammakid]

Seems a futile exercise to try and judge the right livelihood of the job of bounty hunting with only one bounty hunter for a data point.

Ahhh, that statement is a breath of fresh air. Thanks for reminding us of this important aspect.

Namaste,
Dhammakid

[stuka]

Seems a futile exercise to try and judge the right livelihood of the job of bounty hunting with only one bounty hunter for a data point.

True enough, but the premise of the thread was indeed based upon the example of this single data point.

[stuka]

Greetings stuka,

Well, for Dog it looks as if being a bounty hunter is "Improved" livelihood, whether or not it's classified as "Right" or "Wrong".

Metta,
Retro.

It would seem so. That fact does not seem to induce any sort of "nice cozy-warm feeling", however....

[Ben]

All of the silly monkey-chatter aside...

Monkey chatter??

[stuka]

Aye, Monkey-Chatter.

[retrofuturist]

Papanca?

Metta,
Retro.

[stuka]

Papanca?

Metta,
Retro.

Aye, my brother, Papanca. In this case, the papanca of Schadenfreude over the public exploitation of the misfortunes and suffering that others incur, whether they ultimately deserve it, or not.

Just as every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints
As heads is tails
Just call me lucifer
cause Im in need of some restraint

(Photo replaces original of Peter Fechter lying against the Western side of Die Mauer)

Hier liegt Peter Fechter, einer Straftat. Oder war er wirklich?

[Annapurna]

Hi Dhammakid and all

The Buddha gave us criteria for determining what constitutes wrong livelihood, it has been mentioned earlier in this thread. In the post I wrote, I suggested that in assessing whether bounty hunting is indeed wrong livelihood, one would need to determine whether the profession was in anyway business or dealing in weapons or business or dealing with human beings,the latter usually interpreted as trade in prostitutes or slaves. One could argue that bounty hunting could breach business with weapons or business in human beings, directly or by proximity, but I would be unconvinced.
I would argue that bounty hunting is not inherently wrong livelihood. However, that is not to say that there is more than ample opportunity for bounty hunters to engage in morally reprehensible or dubious decisions and/or activities in the hunting of their bounty. While there can be no doubt that the end, making bail jumpers accountable for their actions, is a good thing, does the end justify the morally dubious means some bounty hunters of achieving that aim? Having witnessed the portrayal of one high-profile bounty hunter on TV, can we make a judgment that all bounty hunters are likewise engaged in morally reprehensible activities in order to apprehend the wanted?
Kind regards

Ben

Hello Ben, All,
If the Buddha set out the specific criteria, and if one has to stretch in order to accuse bounty hunters according to that criteria, then I must admit I cannot say bounty hunting is inherently Wrong Livelihood. I am sorry for misinterpreting the Buddha's criteria. I guess I can only say I am vehemently opposed, and bias against, this type of livelihood, as I am law enforcement in general. I just don't see the reason why we should glorifying or giving praise to bounty hunters when they are clearly no more righteous or morally strong than the rest of us. After this thread, can we start praising the work of social workers?

As far as weapons go, does the Buddha make any statement about the use of weapons against other living beings?

Namaste,
Dhammakid

I just don't see the reason why we should glorifying or giving praise to bounty hunters when they are clearly no more righteous or morally strong than the rest of us.

But that is not what is being done when I ask and we simply discuss what type of livelihood it constitutes.

Namaste!

Annabel

[stuka]

But that is not what is being done when I ask and we simply discuss what type of livelihood it constitutes.

Namaste!

Annabel

The problem lies in the indiscriminate nature of the beast.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Is there anything left to be said on the subject from a Theravadin perspective?

If not, we'll move this thread over to the Lounge... where the topic can be addressed more generally.

Annabel, it's your thread... what do you think?

Thanks.

Metta,
Retro.

[Annapurna]

Hello All,
I want to say a few things, coming from a different perspective on law enforcement.

The question begging to be asked is: why is law enforcement and bounty hunting necessary in the first place? Why is crime so rampant? Are human beings just so bad we have to commit crimes? Or could it be our societal structure (government and leaders) perpetuating the circumstances leading to criminality in order to justify its own existence?

Keep in mind that law enforcement and bounty hunting perpetuates all of the negative qualities of masculinity and manhood - violent chauvinism, state control, macho complexes, etc. 99% of rapes are committed by men. 90% of all violent crimes are committed by men. And yet men think they are fixing the problem by using violence to put us into prisons, which are sometimes more violent and dangerous than the streets? Please be real, people.

The problem isn't about human beings as evil or police officers as providing for some greater good (although I'd definitely argue against that bogus claim), but rather a crisis in masculinity and manhood that perpetuates violence in society, further fueled by the same tired old consistencies from the past - men taking control and exerting power over everyone else.

Without poverty, poorly funded education, lack of universal health care, a wishy-washy economy left to the whims of the wealthy elite, and a host of other intentionally set-up circumstances, crime would not be near as prevalent as it is. Ask any criminologist, psychologist or sociologist.

Human beings might be deluded and selfish, but we are not inherently evil. Society teaches evil to children, and then punishes them for it later. Society teaches boys to be violent.

Law enforcement perpetuates criminality. And because law enforcement is practiced by other deluded beings, this honorable picture you are painting is false to the fullest extent.

Ask a poor minority what they think of the police, I'm positive you will get a different answer. Case in point: my mother sued the city for racial and gender discrimination because they conspired to get her fired from the police force, all because she blew the whistle on nearly a century of racial discrimination of citizens and black officers. Furthermore, evidence suggests they were in cahoots with the IRS (who we are currently battling).

Ever heard of police brutality? If police officers can still do that even though they are subject to watchdog groups, what makes you think bounty hunters are exempt?

The nation's drug policy discriminates against the poor and minority. And let's not even get into how nearly impossible it is for a rape victim to find justice.

Bounty hunting is simply citizens who didn't want to go through police boot camp carrying around guns acting as superheroes. And they are almost always men. If the State really wanted to get drugs off the street, or put criminals to justice, they would do it because they have all the tools necessary on their side. But they don't, because they must justify their own existence. "We need laws because people are evil."

Oh, and Dog the Bounty Hunter was called out last year for spewing racial epithets towards the friend of one his children.

Like I said, we are all deluded. Please stop glossing over the evils of law enforcement.

(Typed in passion but kindness )

Namaste,
Dhammakid

P.S. Yes yes, I know...spoken like a true anarchist I guess I should answer the original question: according to my experiences and my analysis, both law enforcement and bounty hunting amounts to Wrong Livelihood. There are far more productive ways to deal with the unskillful actions of deluded human beings, such as rehabilitation and treatment (as opposed to incarceration), greater funding for public education, guaranteed health care for all, violence prevention education at an early age, greater emphasis on community development and self-sustaining communities, and a host of other great alternatives out there. If law enforcement/bounty hunting isn't decreasing the rate of criminality - in other words, not solving the problem at all - but rather perpetuating the problem (as all credible evidence suggests), then one must conclude the institution is Wrong Livelihood, because it is contributing to the suffering of beings (or at least intentionally ignoring it). That is my opinion. Feel free to disagree. Namaste.

Hello, Dhammakid,

The question begging to be asked is: why is law enforcement and bounty hunting necessary in the first place?

Because 'we' (most of us) are caught in Samsara, with greed, hatred, anger and fear.

As such, women as as susceptible to samsaric transgressions, albeit their means differ.

I agree with you they don't usually stand out with rape and violence though.

There are far more productive ways to deal with the unskillful actions of deluded human beings, such as rehabilitation and treatment

Rehabiltation and treatment are not possible with absent criminals, so who is gonna make them show up....? Heidi Klum? (All just volunteered, I guess.... )

90% of all violent crimes are committed by men. And yet men think they are fixing the problem by using violence to put us into prisons,

They don't put "us" into prison, do they? We are not violent criminals, I assume.

I think you are quite right with male violence as the major problem, but I believe some good men have to keep the bad guys at bay, and that is police, law and bounty hunting, if women can't subdue them.

Can they?

[Annapurna]

Greetings,

Is there anything left to be said on the subject from a Theravadin perspective?

If not, we'll move this thread over to the Lounge... where the topic can be addressed more generally.

Annabel, it's your thread... what do you think?

Thanks.

Metta,
Retro.

Oj.

Thank you for asking, I feel respected.

Um, what is the Theravadin conclusion exactly now?
Can we sum it up?

I haven't been able to catch up with all posts yet. I'm still on page 4.

Namaste ,

Annabel

[Annapurna]

I'm on page 5 now. Gimmie a few please. ...

[Annapurna]

May I ask you what you think about bounty hunting- wrong or right livelyhood, or is this a borderline case?

Hi Annabel,

Haven't seen the Dog...except in the news a couple of times...

And to answer your question, I don't really have a view on this one...it is what it is, and I haven't seen any benefit (yet) in pondering the pros and cons of it...

Be well...

Just trying to fully understand the intricacies of the Noble 8 fold path, dear Venerabale, I am utterly bad at accepting things I haven't fully understood. I understand I can be a pain with my need to fully understand.**sigh**

I do 'fall off faiths' when my questions don't get solved, and I would hate to fall off Buddhism.