Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

When is Violence Justified?


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

I couldn’t help but agree with Afua unfortunately. When Corbyn was the victim a lot of people including the media downplayed the whole incident. Complete contrast to when the far right are the victims. People (unfortunately including some posters here) are now lining up, to call someone throwing drinks at another a ‘violent assault’, and a precursor to murder. Very sad to see.

 

How is it sad to see people condemning violence against politicians? What are you talking about man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Boss said:

 

How is it sad to see people condemning violence against politicians? What are you talking about man?

As I have said, I am more worried about the vilification of, and condoning of violence against the press by politicians - but, neither are acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, A Red said:

Yes I do get it, assault includes things such as threats etc that are classed under the law as violence 

No they are not!

 

They are classed under law as common assault: the law doesn't class them as violent. Really. Read the links.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

No they are not!

 

 

Get off the milkshake thing pal, whether your opinion on the definition is or is not legally correct is really quite secondary -- certainly we can all agree that a number of the eggings were violent right?

We can agree that free speech, especially in a legitimate political arena, should be protected right?

 

 

The discussion has got sidetracked from your OP. For me the "violent" part is less troublesome than the word justified with its connotations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, A Red said:

1. Yes there are times when violence is justified 

 

2. I believe the milkshake incident was a non justified violent event as were the others involving eggs

 

3. You've got me on the people thinking dairy products are effective weapons, I have no idea.

You've avoided the most important question. Pah!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

No they are not!

 

They are classed under law as common assault: the law doesn't class them as violent. Really. Read the links.

One last go

 

Assault is a word that means violence. The law will prosecute people for assault (violence) even if it is an act that does not include violence. So, therefore the threat of violence, without any violence, can be treat as violence in law under the heading of assault. Moving on, doing something like milkshaking or egging, which plenty will agree is a violent act either in the real or legal world, could end up with a prosecution for violence under the heading of assault.

 

Whether you think any of this is violence or not doesnt matter, its how the law treats it. 

 

Really try to understand

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, A Red said:

One last go

 

Assault is a word that means violence. The law will prosecute people for assault (violence) even if it is an act that does not include violence. So, therefore the threat of violence, without any violence, can be treat as violence in law under the heading of assault. Moving on, doing something like milkshaking or egging, which plenty will agree is a violent act either in the real or legal world, could end up with a prosecution for violence under the heading of assault.

 

Whether you think any of this is violence or not doesnt matter, its how the law treats it. 

 

Really try to understand

Throwing an egg isn’t violent, punching someone whilst holding an egg is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, A Red said:

One last go

 

Assault is a word that means violence. The law will prosecute people for assault (violence) even if it is an act that does not include violence. So, therefore the threat of violence, without any violence, can be treat as violence in law under the heading of assault. Moving on, doing something like milkshaking or egging, which plenty will agree is a violent act either in the real or legal world, could end up with a prosecution for violence under the heading of assault.

 

Whether you think any of this is violence or not doesnt matter, its how the law treats it. 

 

Really try to understand

Assault does not automatically equal violence. This simply isn't true. You've cited a couple of sentences from Web pages to try and substantiate this claim - the sentencing council and some random regional police page. 

 

You still haven't provided a single legal authority which states that assault = violence. That's because it doesn't automatically. The case law cited has provided several examples of assault not involving violence, but you've then put your own interpretation on what was being said to back up your argument, which is simply not an accurate or true one. 

 

Violence is something that somebody does. A person's action. Not how another person reacts to it. Assault is not a word that means violence in this sense. It has a distinct, separate legal meaning. And can clearly involve conduct which is by no means "violent" 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, much as i would love to continue with this debate, i'm showered, dressed and off out on the piss. Please understand, there are woman down town that will be devastated if not actually suicidal if they cannot get even a small glimpse of me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s hilarious.  You can throw eggs at people and it’s not violence.  But if I throw something at someone that’s the same shape and weight as an egg it’s violence?  What if it’s boiled?  Ive got an ace arm, I reckon I could do any of you serious damage with an egg from a couple of feet. All because you are commie cunts.  You wouldn’t report me to the police obviously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheHowieLama said:

Get off the milkshake thing pal, whether your opinion on the definition is or is not legally correct is really quite secondary -- certainly we can all agree that a number of the eggings were violent right?

We can agree that free speech, especially in a legitimate political arena, should be protected right?

 

 

The discussion has got sidetracked from your OP. For me the "violent" part is less troublesome than the word justified with its connotations.

I'd be more than happy to get away from milkshakes and eggings and get back to the broader issues of moral philosophical questions about violence  (i.e. injuring or killing people).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, A Red said:

Right, much as i would love to continue with this debate, i'm showered, dressed and off out on the piss. Please understand, there are woman down town that will be devastated if not actually suicidal if they cannot get even a small glimpse of me.

Slip a feather duster up their bums from me.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

It’s hilarious.  You can throw eggs at people and it’s not violence.  But if I throw something at someone that’s the same shape and weight as an egg it’s violence?  What if it’s boiled?  Ive got an ace arm, I reckon I could do any of you serious damage with an egg from a couple of feet. All because you are commie cunts.  You wouldn’t report me to the police obviously. 

Get to bed you blert

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

You said that if Corbyn said throwing a milkshake was violence that you’d disagree with him, the gif I posted represents my view that I don’t believe you.

You don't believe that if someone said something that I don't agree with, I wouldn't agree with them?

 

I think you may be a cock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Boss said:

 

How is it sad to see people condemning violence against politicians? What are you talking about man?

I find it sad that the media and the general public have more sympathy for Tommy Robinson, Farage than Jeremy Corbyn, even though the latter actually got punched in the head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

I find it sad that the media and the general public have more sympathy for Tommy Robinson, Farage than Jeremy Corbyn, even though the latter actually got punched in the head.

What media and general public have you surrounded yourself with?  Get out now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...