The Righteous Sniper

Can killing those who kill justify the act?

Before he became an anonymous sniper...

He served in the Middle East. The missions and the kills assigned never bothered him. The casualties, however, bothered him. Once he realized he couldn't control the deaths of casualties, he retired. When he came back home, he noticed that he could have more control if he killed on his own. He didn't kill people who robbed banks, sold drugs, or committed fraud. He began killing those who committed murder, the ones that got away. The criminals that the courts could not find guilty.

Avoids getting caught...

He moves from state to state. And in serious cases, country to country. Never hits the same city twice. The righteous sniper studies his subjects and their schedules before he makes the move on killing them. One shot from any building in the city is all it takes. He doesn't kidnap and torture them. He doesn't find it necessary. They just need to die quickly so others, the innocent, won't get killed. Whenever a case is made, the police department never really looks into it. They believe justice is being served.

What's the harm?

Deciding who deserves the death penalty isn't his decision, its the courts decision. But what if the court can't catch these people? What if the court allows these animals to continue to kill? The righteous sniper doesn't kill those who he suspects of killing. He gathers evidence and studies their behavior. Do they show remorse? No, no they don't. That's when he knows that the world has a sociopath on their hands. One they don't need.