If this is an actual article I would very much like to read it. I am curious how they build an argument that extra-judicial remedies are dangerous when it has been proven by clear and convincing evidence that the judicial ones did in fact fail. Reminds me of a story I heard about English Judges in the early days of the Old Bailey. After sentencing a man to death, new, exculpatory evidence was presenting proving without doubt the man's innocence. However, the Judges refused to vacate their sentence because the English Courts do not make mistakes. I believe in the Appeal to Heaven model. I will use the Courts so long as they continue to function properly. But if they fail I will seek an appeal of my grievances elsewhere.