Jump to content
AngryOfTuebrook

When is Violence Justified?

Recommended Posts

On the issue of milkshakes and eggs, I've just googled some definitions of violence. There's a lot of talk about the intention to cause physical hurt, harm or damage; no mention of the intention to piss someone off and leave them with a dry cleaning bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Is that an absolute? So, for example, you would have been a conscientious objector in World War 2? Or (a more extreme example) if someone was attacking your family, would you stand there saying "please stop"?

Are you aware how heavily insured my wife is? 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If some random fella threw a milkshake over me in the street and in retaliation I punched him , breaking his jaw, would I be in the wrong or him? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bjornebye said:

If some random fella threw a milkshake over me in the street and in retaliation I punched him , breaking his jaw, would I be in the wrong or him? 

Both. Excessive force isn’t it? 

Give him a wedgie and you’re grand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Both. Excessive force isn’t it? 

Give him a wedgie and you’re grand.

Well is it? If I felt threatened and lashed out in self-defence which just so happened to break his jaw would I really be in the wrong? A wedgie could be deemed as a pre-meditated assault. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we need to blow this argument up into a bigger issue. 

 

Is throwing any form of liquid at someone an act of violence? If so, how many women/men and children have gone without punishment? How many break ups are actually criminal assaults? How many children have gone without a full review of social services and involvement of the youth justice system? When will we see justice in the peak of such societal decline? 

 

Injustice aside, and whilst I think it's comical that a milkshake event has exploded into political discourse, I think it's about time we knocked it on the head. It's all fun and games until someone throws a bottle of urine at someones head and causes serious injury or before someone steps over the mark with something more intentional. 

 

If we want a society that encourages freedom of speech and the right to challenge the status quo then we need to be respectful of that and allow everyone to share their ideas or thoughts. In the same manner as how we'd like ours to be heard, shared and discussed. Whether Tory, Labour, Green, Brexit or some twit called Tommy, we all stem from the same soil and therefore we should discuss everything with the view of improving that very origin - and challenge discussions that perpetuate hatred/violence, false information or bias. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Seasons said:

I think we need to blow this argument up into a bigger issue. 

 

Is throwing any form of liquid at someone an act of violence? If so, how many women/men and children have gone without punishment? How many break ups are actually criminal assaults? How many children have gone without a full review of social services and involvement of the youth justice system? When will we see justice in the peak of such societal decline? 

 

Injustice aside, and whilst I think it's comical that a milkshake event has exploded into political discourse, I think it's about time we knocked it on the head. It's all fun and games until someone throws a bottle of urine at someones head and causes serious injury or before someone steps over the mark with something more intentional. 

 

If we want a society that encourages freedom of speech and the right to challenge the status quo then we need to be respectful of that and allow everyone to share their ideas or thoughts. In the same manner as how we'd like ours to be heard, shared and discussed. Whether Tory, Labour, Green, Brexit or some twit called Tommy, we all stem from the same soil and therefore we should discuss everything with the view of improving that very origin - and challenge discussions that perpetuate hatred/violence, false information or bias. 

Fuck off 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rico1304 said:

Im sure normalising having drinks thrown on politicians will encourage just the right type of person to stand for office.  I mean there’s nothing wrong with a big burly bloke chucking a drink at a woman because he disagrees with her right?  Maybe following her, waiting outside her house to do it?   

What the fuck, honestly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jose Jones said:

Thing is though, you are happy to use or promote violence against your enemies.

And I'm pretty sure those people would say that you are promoting women/gays/muslims at the expense of others (white men).  So, who gets to decide who gets kicked in?

You’re really going there? People who fight fascists are the real fascists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Fuck off 

 

Changing my response. 

 

Violence is acceptable when you receive targeted abuse from nonces who don't show up at KFC when called out for a Shake off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TK421 said:

Garlic mayo shits all over ketchup as an accompinament for one's fries. Come at me.

 

I'm also in the GM camp. Come at TK421 too. 

 

No tag-ins. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, moof said:

You’re really going there? People who fight fascists are the real fascists?

No, I’m asking you who you think gets to decide?

You think a fella deserves a kicking, he thinks you deserve a kicking. You both believe you are in the right and the other one is a scourge on society.

 

Who gets to decide who’s right? An independent panel headed by Noam Chomsky gets to declare who is actually worthy of a shoeing and who is just a bit of a misinformed idiot?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Seasons said:

 

Changing my response. 

 

Violence is acceptable when you receive targeted abuse from nonces who don't show up at KFC when called out for a Shake off. 

If you want some I'll give it yer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

 

 

Who gets to decide who’s right? An independent panel headed by Noam Chomsky gets to declare who is actually worthy of a shoeing and who is just a bit of a misinformed idiot?

 

Well, yeah. That would be sound.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, moof said:

You’re really going there? People who fight fascists are the real fascists?

People that use violence, intimidation, etc, to close down political discourse are in the wrong, no matter what side of the argument they come from. You hate these people every bit as much as I do, but I’d urge you to take a step back and look at it from an exterior position (going in the garden helps). 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

People that use violence, intimidation, etc, to close down political discourse are in the wrong, no matter what side of the argument they come from. You hate these people every bit as much as I do, but I’d urge you to take a step back and look at it from an exterior position (going in the garden helps). 

 

This is predicated on the notion that fascists are legitimate political actors? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Seasons said:

 

Don't make me chin your cat lad. 

My cat would fucking web you everywhere you soft cunt 

 

 

 

*I haven't got a cat I borrow next doors when I'm horny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

No, I’m asking you who you think gets to decide?

You think a fella deserves a kicking, he thinks you deserve a kicking. You both believe you are in the right and the other one is a scourge on society.

 

Who gets to decide who’s right? An independent panel headed by Noam Chomsky gets to declare who is actually worthy of a shoeing and who is just a bit of a misinformed idiot?

This is so idiotic that even Rico seems to agree with you. Sorry mate, I just don’t get where you’re coming from at all. I’m not cool with any old misinformed idiot getting a “shoeing”, I’m cool with fascist leaders like Richard Spencer getting punched while he’s trying to conduct an interview espousing his fascist views. If you think that makes me exactly the same as him, I don’t know what to tell you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×