I surely can't be alone in thinking 'society' is NOT equal to 'the Law'.
Philip are you saying the Law reflects each society's ideal structure for justice? or maybe the Law in your area reflects an/THE ideal structure for justice?
I believe we should take justice into our own hands as and when required by circumstance. Most of the time that'd be law-abiding anyway.
I happen to believe Terry's throat-grab of bottle-chucker was well within my own view of justice, given the story and no extra facts.
What I am saying is you don't take the law into your own hands. Terry's actions means he by-passed the law, took matters into his own hands. Terry wasn't stopping a crime. He committed one too and both men got away with it. The end result is the emotional release Terry got from it, verses, calling the cops having the guy arrested. But some people are brawlers and feel the best way to resolve conflict is with violence, when violence is really not needed to resolve the conflict.
What if we allowed everyone to act like Terry did? The answer is seen in history of New York with all the gangs and violence, or the Barbary Coast of S.F. More importantly not everyone can intimidate people like Terry did. From what I can tell the guy was smaller than Terry. And as I said before, Terry is lucky he wasn't stabbed, or shot. I am not into vigilante justice, it tends to be more romanticized than it really is, and I ain't made for that, it wouldn't work for me. What is the saying, the pen is greater than the sword.
Here is what I really want to say is my major point. The law parallels O'Sensei's views on violence and peace, society wants a peaceful civil society, and not a violent chaotic society. That means yes you will have a murder rate, and other crime rates. But what you don't have is a feral society driven by violence. O'Sensei as difficult to understand, is really over-ridden by society (most I know of) that sets peace as its goals for its people.
I don't know about you, but prision isn't a society I would want to live in.