Some bad deeds need not be punished.

"Power without law is tyranny;
Law without power is meaningless"

What is power without law? Is it tyranny? Power with law can be tyranny, too.

Power without law… if used for purposes that benefit those who are eligible to benefit, then yes, without law, power can still be useful.

Law without power is meaningless?
Very TRUE!


Applying the quote above to the 1962 film, starring John Wayne and Jimmy Stewart, “Who Shot Liberty Valance?” there is a lot to consider…

Liberty Valance was a gunman employed by the local cattle cartel, directed to keep the town in line so that the barons could monopolize the local resources to insure their beef industry. He used his power to intimidate and abuse others. He definitely enjoyed dishing it out and he did so without the power of the law behind him. In this case, yes… Power without law is tyranny, because the man was a tyrant! But, what if he were Sherriff? Could he still intimidate and abuse people? Of course he could! So, I cannot go along with the absolute that says as long as the law is behind you, no one will call you tyrannical. I do, however; feel that law without power is meaningless. We have laws because we understand that just knowing right from wrong, does not ensure that everyone will always make the right choice. We realize that in order to promote that our civil liberties are not trespassed upon; we must deter those who would otherwise trespass upon us. How else do you deter someone from doing what they know is wrong, but to uphold a penalty? Absolutely, I feel that law without power is MEANINGLESS! By the way, it is just as true that upholding the law some of the time leads people to think that breaking the law might just be worth it. The penalty should be case specific and not biased, but the law must still be upheld and without laxity.
Did Tom Doniphon shoot Liberty Valance because he was in love with Hallie and would have done anything for her, even though she was married to Ransom Stoddard, as some people have suggested? Did he do so, as a favor (that he knew would not be acknowledged) for a woman he loved because he thought that her husband being killed in a shootout would be too much for her? I think not. If he loved her that much, he probably would have let her husband die so that he could “pick up the pieces.” No… People do strange things for love, but murdering someone for love unrequited, would be a rare thing, I think. The probability that Doniphon shot and killed Liberty, was likely because he was sick of his bullying ways, which were not limited to his interactions with Ransom. Face it, he did everyone a favor, himself included. That is why, Ransom held onto the truth, of who shot Liberty Valance, until after Doniphon was dead; so that Doniphon could not be prosecuted for doing the right thing in that situation. Speaking of “law without power is meaningless,” Ransom built a very successful political career on the people’s belief that he had and was not afraid to use, his power. And what did the reporter do? He threw away his notes from his meeting with Ransom. Even he knew that some bad deeds need not be punished, which proves that there exists the opinion, that special circumstances can and do apply. Yes, it was just a movie, but I maintain that art does tend to imitate life… with flair! It is through art that we are able to tell of things that would not be received in the same way if they were spoken in a crowd of strangers; certainly not in the reality of day to day life. Hooray, for art!
Like the song says…The point of a gun was the only law that a man like Liberty understood….The man who shot Liberty Valance, he was the bravest of them all!