I hope you have a good lawyer. Self defense does not always equal justified lethal force. In no state would Penny not have been convicted of murder if he had shot Neely dead.
Women and children most certainly should.
My old training partner, all his daughters are grapplers, plus they are damn strong in lifting. Stronger than most average men.
Don’t mess with ‘em
I would beat all of them at the same time. And I’m not the toughest guy out there.
1 Like
What if they have tribal tat sleeves and wear tapout shirts?
1 Like
Why is that?
I don’t think we need more heroes. I think we need to reintroduce social norms, specifically one for which it is understood by society that its members understand they are justified in behaving the way Daniel Perry did without having to fear their lives will be ruined. We shouldn’t be in a position in which we need a few lone heroes.
My cousin who works in Manhattan has been called a white bitch (she is not white but is white-presenting, as I am), had her shoes urinated on, and been shoved. That, along with the other women who have experienced the same or worse, and other people who have been brutally beaten, assaulted, and shoved onto subway tracks. (But hey, according to some, “It’s not that bad”–“not that bad” until harm hits them or their towns.) A sane society would have it that men would be scared to death for these actions, knowing they would be in for punishment by onlookers immediately.
I see you’ve mentioned society and “the system” several times and implied individuals should live as lone wolves granted vigilante justice unto each. While I think legalized revenge and protection should be granted in some cases (it’s not happening), I don’t know how a society could run by your sentiments or if such an environment can even be called a society. By your sentiment, how would a society go about protecting its most vulnerable members?
2 Likes
Yeah me too.
But first, I hope I’m not in a self-defense scenario to begin with.
If I am, I’m shooting.
But the tangent you’re trying to peel has already been discussed earlier in this thread.
1 Like
I’d imagine she’s white(as are you, unless I’m mistaken about your origins being in the “original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa”).
Race and National Origin | National Institutes of Health (NIH).
We’re obviously not a sane society.
1 Like
Where do I ever say vigilante justice?
I’m for defending yourself.
If someone wants to threaten someone’s life in public, it might not be self defense until the threat becomes active, but people shouldn’t be comfortable walking around thinking their actions in public won’t have any consequences.
As I said before, I have mixed feelings.
I’m fine with this case being used as an example that freedom of speech has consequences but I still laugh at FOX news looking for protection. It’s as annoying as thier country music.
I hate New Year’s Eve, all I see is pop rock / hip hop and country.
1 Like
God forbid people are protected. I think you don’t even know what you’re trying to say most of the time.
If I were you, I would too.
Not sure what you’re talking about here. I’m pretty sure FOX has the resources to secure whatever protection it needs. I think they are talking about ordinary people who have to use public transportation and walk the streets alone.
1 Like
Maybe feeling threatened by a chit talking chump is the weakness???
I ignore them f-ers.
I bet my old training partners daughters could beat that guy up and were tough enough to ignore him when they were 5years old.
Ignoring chit talk is so easy for strong people.
Once that chit talker puts the hands on, defending becomes necessary.
As I said I have mixed feelings but I’m strongly leaning towards the above.
This implies people should accept verbal abuse and intimidation while out and about in public, including confined spaces like subway cars and elevators and that only mentally weak people are put off by it.
3 Likes
Whether you “feel threatened by a chump” is actually completely irrelevant to whether or a not a threat is present. You don’t know what that chump can do until it starts to happen.
You can’t ignore someone on a confined subway car. There is nowhere to go to get away. That’s one of the main elements of this case.
6 Likes
Once again, you show yourself to be a troll or a retard.
1 Like
Well I’m totally against subways anyway.
Plus I’m against high rises with elevators, airplanes too.
All of these are f-ing death traps for humans.
I’m way more scared of these things than a chit talking chump that mostly with the right words could make the guy calm down.
You know most of people’s frustrations are these fing things we do that we don’t really want to do, like riding rails everyday or even driving to the office and being up in some high rise.
Another thing annoying about FOX is they cry about “get back into the office”, f-that!
Legally and ethically, these are two different things. The law does not permit you to respond to verbal abuse with violence (though lots of “honor cultures,” like the hillbilly one I grew up in, certainly call for it). Threats are a different matter. You can respond with reasonable force to protect yourself from the imminent threat of violence. In the latter case, context is important. Being in a moving subway car is different than walking on a street.
3 Likes
By the way, the most frightening and violent incident I could’ve died in as a naive, innocent seventeen year old could’ve possibly been avoided if I didn’t ignore and wish my attacker, a violent psychopath, away.
It actually started with a joke and a sinister smile.
1 Like
Right. Perhaps accept was the wrong word to use.
And you don’t know what they have in their pocket/waistband.
“I’m going to kill you”
Adios.