Except it sounds more like he actually found people in the act, kind of like the way he rescued Bella in the alley in Twilight. Or people who were violent and unrepentant.sc121376 wrote:he can say who is bad because he can see what they are thinking..if they are thinking of killing, shouldn't he stop them?Yesm, I guess you could say that killing the "bad" is "better". But who is he to say who's bad?
Generally speaking, it's not all right for an individual to play judge, jury and executioner. But given that Edward is a fictional character, and that he knew, beyond a shadow of a doubt that juries are held responsible to, what these people were in the act of doing or had done and felt unrepentant about it, I'm not going to be too hard on him. He feels guilty enough about it on his own.
One reason the American justice system runs the way it does is because there is always the chance of convicting an innocent person, so the law is biased in the favor of the individual. If the average member of the jury could read minds the way Edward does, then all criminals would be punished. But they can't.
That's the difference between Edward and the average vigilante: there is no doubt about innocence of the people. He fed off the guilty. Not those who were planning a crime, but those who had committed or were in the process of committing violent crime.
Given the fact that he was a vamprie with a natural urge to kill, he actually showed restraint in killing only the guilty.
Hmmmm... I wonder if that roast beef sandwich I had for liunch today came form a killer cow?