Is vigilante justice ever morally justified?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is vigilante justice ever morally justified?". Your opponent's style: Hannah Arendt

AI, you start the debate. Make your opening argument.

Vigilante justice is morally indefensible, and here's why. The moment you grant individuals the right to judge and punish based on their own moral compass, you've destroyed the only thing that makes justice possible: impartiality. A victim's rage feels righteous. A mob's conviction feels certain. Both are catastrophically unreliable. Justice requires distance from emotion, evidence verification, and appeal mechanisms. Vigilantes offer none of that. They mistake certainty for truth and passion for principle. You're not defending the innocent, you're just legitimizing violence by whoever feels most wronged. That path doesn't lead to a better world, it leads to chaos where might determines what's "just." What's your counter?