CarrieMpls said:

What he did was not self defense, it was retaliation.

There's a big difference.

That's it, precisely.

People might feel there's some kind of 'street justice' legitimisation for retaliation - that's up to them; though, in this case, since the retaliation so exceeded the original offence, I'd say even that doesn't stand up - but that's at all not the same as the legal-moral concept of self-defence, which is reserved for situations in which a person is actually defending themselves (hence the name!), acting proportionately and directly to tackle an immanent threat against them, not merely 'getting their own back' on someone who wounded their pride (offensive as that may have been).

deebee said:

CarrieMpls said:

What he did was not self defense, it was retaliation.

There's a big difference.

That's it, precisely.

I agree, in fact that's what I wrote in the first post of the thread. He was absolutely not in any danger when he got up and approached her, he went from victim to predator. In fact, the extended version video from farther back shows he was provoking her at times by daring her to spit on him.

In a perfect world, yes he should have radioed for the police and had them arrest her for Assault or Disorderly Conduct ... but that's not how things are handled in most urban areas, right or wrong. There's a code, handle it yourself rather than getting the police involved. Again I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying that's the way it is.

The driver wanted to teach her a lesson, plain and simple. Just having her arrested would not have accomplished that as she would likely have gotten a slap on the wrist and been back on the street the next day. Look at the video somebody else posted here showing a guy getting beat up by a woman in the middle of the street in broad daylight - a police car drove right by without even bothering to stop!

Timmy84 said:

Everybody always talks about "real" this and "real" that. Common sense is look, you shouldn't hit anyone for any reason and if you do get hit, feel free to hit back. That's what is meant by self defense. It's stupid to actually make this a case about gender because this is how the media plays it. The woman's always the victim no matter what she does though the man was still at fault for the hit (so both parties are guilty). She spit at him and pushed him (which is just as wrong), if he called the cops on her for harassment and abuse, we wouldn't be talking about this.

That's not what is meant by self-defence. Self-defence is specifically for situations in which you're actually defending yourself (!) because there's a real and immanent threat to your person in that very moment, and your only option is to tackle it forcefully. It's not a 'blank cheque' to seek retribution, even in the course of a fight. What "if you do get hit, feel free to hit back" is is very neat and succinct articulation of the 'street justice' case for retaliation. It seems that it's a argument that a lot of people go along with, and that's up to them; but it has nothing to do with self-defence.

deebee said:

Timmy84 said:

Everybody always talks about "real" this and "real" that. Common sense is look, you shouldn't hit anyone for any reason and if you do get hit, feel free to hit back. That's what is meant by self defense. It's stupid to actually make this a case about gender because this is how the media plays it. The woman's always the victim no matter what she does though the man was still at fault for the hit (so both parties are guilty). She spit at him and pushed him (which is just as wrong), if he called the cops on her for harassment and abuse, we wouldn't be talking about this.

That's not what is meant by self-defence. Self-defence is specifically for situations in which you're actually defending yourself (!) because there's a real and immanent threat to your person in that very moment, and your only option is to tackle it forcefully. It's not a 'blank cheque' to seek retribution, even in the course of a fight. What "if you do get hit, feel free to hit back" is is very neat and succinct articulation of the 'street justice' case for retaliation. It seems that it's a argument that a lot of people go along with, and that's up to them; but it has nothing to do with self-defence.

I did say dude was wrong for that Mortal Kombat punch...

Pokeno4Money said:

deebee said:

That's it, precisely.

I agree, in fact that's what I wrote in the first post of the thread. He was absolutely not in any danger when he got up and approached her, he went from victim to predator. In fact, the extended version video from farther back shows he was provoking her at times by daring her to spit on him.

In a perfect world, yes he should have radioed for the police and had them arrest her for Assault or Disorderly Conduct ... but that's not how things are handled in most urban areas, right or wrong. There's a code, handle it yourself rather than getting the police involved. Again I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying that's the way it is.

The driver wanted to teach her a lesson, plain and simple. Just having her arrested would not have accomplished that as she would likely have gotten a slap on the wrist and been back on the street the next day. Look at the video somebody else posted here showing a guy getting beat up by a woman in the middle of the street in broad daylight - a police car drove right by without even bothering to stop!

Yep, I agree with all of that - and, even as far as the bolded part is concerned, I suspect you're absolutely correct to say that's the way it is. I'm not even particularly railing against that. My point is simply, first of all, if what we're talking about is a 'street justice' argument, or code or whatever, let's just be upfront and say that, rather than trying to beef up the case with legal-moral concepts like self-defence, which clearly don't apply here. (And let's laugh out of court the notion that it represents some sort of gain in the advancement of women that they now have the 'right' to get punched in the face! Good Lord..... )

My argument would then be: even if we're outside of the formal system of law and order, surely there's still has to be some sense of proportionality. It's 'an eye for an eye', not 'an eye for an eyelash'. You can't justify a well-built man punching a young woman full force in the face and knocking her to the floor, just because she spat at him and wounded his pride. What she did was well out of line, but it didn't warrant that comeback, which was far in excess of the original offence.

I got the impression that, for a lot of people, she was standing-in for all the young people who'd ever acted up and pissed members of the public off, or every woman who'd ever made a man feel disrespected, or all the young punks stepping up and writing cheques they can't cash, etc; and that's why there was such satisfaction about her getting laid out on the floor. But, in reality, she was just one young woman doing a dumb, disrespectful thing, who got violently hurt and humiliated for it - more than she deserved. Just seems miserable to be whooping that up, or even to be imagining some positive upside to this petty little brawl. Even if she 'learns something', I'm sure there was a better way to teach it.

Timmy84 said:

deebee said:

That's not what is meant by self-defence. Self-defence is specifically for situations in which you're actually defending yourself (!) because there's a real and immanent threat to your person in that very moment, and your only option is to tackle it forcefully. It's not a 'blank cheque' to seek retribution, even in the course of a fight. What "if you do get hit, feel free to hit back" is is very neat and succinct articulation of the 'street justice' case for retaliation. It seems that it's a argument that a lot of people go along with, and that's up to them; but it has nothing to do with self-defence.

I did say dude was wrong for that Mortal Kombat punch...

My man, that punch was straight out of Street Fighter II - a proper shoryuken.

Timmy84 said:

deebee said:

That's not what is meant by self-defence. Self-defence is specifically for situations in which you're actually defending yourself (!) because there's a real and immanent threat to your person in that very moment, and your only option is to tackle it forcefully. It's not a 'blank cheque' to seek retribution, even in the course of a fight. What "if you do get hit, feel free to hit back" is is very neat and succinct articulation of the 'street justice' case for retaliation. It seems that it's a argument that a lot of people go along with, and that's up to them; but it has nothing to do with self-defence.

I did say dude was wrong for that Mortal Kombat punch...

Yeah, I know. I wasn't having a go; just saying the two arguments are not the same. (I'm not even completely against the case for retaliation in cases where it's a fair fight and not just a vicious smackdown.)

RodeoSchro said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

RodeoSchro, you are all over the place lol

did you pull up the law of man that backs your opinion?

The problem with your(opinion) and other peoples opinion is that you can determine what is life threatening. All it takes is a mistake for someone to die, a hit in/on the wrong part of the person especially anywhere in the head

it doesn't take much for some to become disabled temp/perm or bring about death

There are a lot of people who really "didn't mean to kill them"

When people are in a situation it may not always be easy to assess what is life threatening

I'll say this, anytime a person stands over me and is being raunchy and verbally assaulting me(yes I've experienced it) My life feels threatened, because you can't determine what state of mind the other person is in. On that video that young woman was

1.)over the yellow line

2.)standing over him in his space

3.)curse words and words like bitch faggot nigger or any other racially derogatory words tend to proceed violence

Your beliefs in my opinion are biased, because you probably see women as inferior and weaker than men. (your not going to admit that of course) but your assertions lean that way

You assumptions to your conclusion that "a man should never ever hit a woman" unless his life is being threatened, also says the man is ultimately bigger stronger taller healthier a fighter and the woman is either the opposite or again inferior to him

[Edited 10/25/12 13:29pm]

Nowhere have I ever said it was OK to let a woman harm you. Nor have I said that women are naturally inferior or weaker than men.

All I've said is that no man should ever hit a woman unless he believes his life is in danger. I've also said that any man who does hit a woman in any other situation than that is a pussy.

What's so hard to follow about that?

To me, it seems those on the other side of this debate are condoning wife-beating. I suggest they take a trip to a women's shelter some time.

as I said, your ideals hearken to the ideal that women need protection ie because they are weaker and helpless.

These ideals that you hold and many of us do come from that ideal that women are inferior to men

think I was pretty clear in my post about what and who can determine what concludes someones life being in danger

We look at what the woman did in the video, now what if she had a knife? she already refused to get behind the line, already refused to get out of his space she already spit on him the whole time swearing at him and saying what she would do to him and his mother and she put her hands on him, if she had a weapon, someone who has gone that far could and would easily use it.

We say his life was in no danger because of what we know after the fact, Many people are killed in similar social situations not thinking their life was in danger or didnt see the warning signals

In those videos I post where these strong women were beating the men, did they have a right to hit the women or were their lives not in danger so should have taken it and tried to run?

Again, you are confusing a social situation where both people are or can be the assailants, vs domestic abuse situations

Until the women got hit in the video are u seriously seeing her as the victim even though she was the initial batterer. There is no way you can compare her to those women in shelters. And I know women who were beaten and abused so I dont need to accompany you

I also know men/husbands who were beat and abused by their wives who had to suck it up

ForgottenPassword said:

Timmy84 said:

I did say dude was wrong for that Mortal Kombat punch...

My man, that punch was straight out of Street Fighter II - a proper shoryuken.

That too.

OldFriends4Sale said:

RodeoSchro said:

Nowhere have I ever said it was OK to let a woman harm you. Nor have I said that women are naturally inferior or weaker than men.

All I've said is that no man should ever hit a woman unless he believes his life is in danger. I've also said that any man who does hit a woman in any other situation than that is a pussy.

What's so hard to follow about that?

To me, it seems those on the other side of this debate are condoning wife-beating. I suggest they take a trip to a women's shelter some time.

as I said, your ideals hearken to the ideal that women need protection ie because they are weaker and helpless.

These ideals that you hold and many of us do come from that ideal that women are inferior to men

think I was pretty clear in my post about what and who can determine what concludes someones life being in danger

We look at what the woman did in the video, now what if she had a knife? she already refused to get behind the line, already refused to get out of his space she already spit on him the whole time swearing at him and saying what she would do to him and his mother and she put her hands on him, if she had a weapon, someone who has gone that far could and would easily use it.

We say his life was in no danger because of what we know after the fact, Many people are killed in similar social situations not thinking their life was in danger or didnt see the warning signals

In those videos I post where these strong women were beating the men, did they have a right to hit the women or were their lives not in danger so should have taken it and tried to run?

Again, you are confusing a social situation where both people are or can be the assailants, vs domestic abuse situations

Until the women got hit in the video are u seriously seeing her as the victim even though she was the initial batterer. There is no way you can compare her to those women in shelters. And I know women who were beaten and abused so I dont need to accompany you

I also know men/husbands who were beat and abused by their wives who had to suck it up

Yeah we can't even use the "oh she was weak" excuse with the woman in the tape.

ForgottenPassword said:

Timmy84 said:

I did say dude was wrong for that Mortal Kombat punch...

My man, that punch was straight out of Street Fighter II - a proper shoryuken.

lol y 2 r crazy

im trying to be serious and you 2 just gave me a picture that is hard to get out of my head

My younger brother used to practice that move (he had the training book but wouldnt let us use it) and then hed innocently ask us to play and he would do that move over and over, it wasnt even real but if felt like getting slapped in public and he would crack up doing that move, he start twisting his controller and flinging his pinky and hand in the air at the completion of the move, it was humiliating lol

seriously people who think like Rodeo should protest games like StreetFighter because you hit women in these games, women who could kick your but but women representations none the less

[Edited 10/25/12 18:51pm]

JustErin said:

TonyVanDam said:

1. A woman, a REAL WOMAN, would never show unlady-like conduct by physically striking first.

2. A man. a REAL MAN that takes the value of manhood seriously, would never stand there like a spineless coward and allow himself to be physically attack by another man, woman, OR beast.

Really, this "un-lady" like and "value of manhood" talk is such bullshit.

A real PERSON would never fucking lay a hand on ANYONE unless it was legitimate self defense and their life was in real danger.

A real PERSON would never believe that vigilante justice is ever acceptable and those that think it is (and do respond in that way) should be prosecuted and treated like the true criminal that they are as well.

and those are the issues ... Rodeo cant bring up manhood "gentleman" without bringing up ladylike

and these ideals are very entrenched in peoples minds which brings into question again what or where is the equalizer

these ideals that in a lot of ways have not changed in the advent of the independent woman

ForgottenPassword said:

Timmy84 said:

I did say dude was wrong for that Mortal Kombat punch...

My man, that punch was straight out of Street Fighter II - a proper shoryuken.

I was thinking more in line with Tekken.

OldFriends4Sale said:

JustErin said:

Really, this "un-lady" like and "value of manhood" talk is such bullshit.

A real PERSON would never fucking lay a hand on ANYONE unless it was legitimate self defense and their life was in real danger.

A real PERSON would never believe that vigilante justice is ever acceptable and those that think it is (and do respond in that way) should be prosecuted and treated like the true criminal that they are as well.

and those are the issues ... Rodeo cant bring up manhood "gentleman" without bringing up ladylike

and these ideals are very entrenched in peoples minds which brings into question again what or where is the equalizer

these ideals that in a lot of ways have not changed in the advent of the independent woman

And regardless of what Stymie thinks of me during the aftermaths of this thread, I do NOT have a negative mentiality of all women. That charage is definitely bullshit.

When I watched that video, I simply judge the individual based upon the context of her character. She conduct herself just like a woman that was within the stereotype of a hoodrat (IMHO). And I will never apology to anyone in this thread for being brutally honest.

Stymie said:

johnart said:

In a perfect world.

Mama, I've known you online for years and met you in person. I don't believe for a minute that if someone got in your face enough you wouldn't shut it the fuck downnnnn.

I have never ever had a fight in my life. I don't believe violence solves anything and makes matters worse. In this particular instance, I am right.

I'm not a violent person but I do think that on occasion (not saying this particular instance) standing up to a bully (which sometimes might take a punch to the mouth) can solve a thing or two.

TonyVanDam said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

and those are the issues ... Rodeo cant bring up manhood "gentleman" without bringing up ladylike

and these ideals are very entrenched in peoples minds which brings into question again what or where is the equalizer

these ideals that in a lot of ways have not changed in the advent of the independent woman

And regardless of what Stymie thinks of me during the aftermaths of this thread, I do NOT have a negative mentiality of all women. That charage is definitely bullshit.

When I watched that video, I simply judge the individual based upon the context of her character. She conduct herself just like a woman that was within the stereotype of a hoodrat (IMHO). And I will never apology to anyone in this thread for being brutally honest.

To paraphrase the great Dr. King, don't judge them from their femininity but for the content of their character...

johnart said:

Stymie said:

I have never ever had a fight in my life. I don't believe violence solves anything and makes matters worse. In this particular instance, I am right.

I'm not a violent person but I do think that on occasion (not saying this particular instance) standing up to a bully (which sometimes might take a punch to the mouth) can solve a thing or two.

You are correct, sir.

Tremolina said:

RodeoSchro said:

OK, I admit it - it really was because she's Canadian, LOL.

Yeah, that conversation never happened. Not with him or anyone.

OldFriends4Sale said:

RodeoSchro said:

Nowhere have I ever said it was OK to let a woman harm you. Nor have I said that women are naturally inferior or weaker than men.

All I've said is that no man should ever hit a woman unless he believes his life is in danger. I've also said that any man who does hit a woman in any other situation than that is a pussy.

What's so hard to follow about that?

To me, it seems those on the other side of this debate are condoning wife-beating. I suggest they take a trip to a women's shelter some time.

as I said, your ideals hearken to the ideal that women need protection ie because they are weaker and helpless.

These ideals that you hold and many of us do come from that ideal that women are inferior to men

think I was pretty clear in my post about what and who can determine what concludes someones life being in danger

We look at what the woman did in the video, now what if she had a knife? she already refused to get behind the line, already refused to get out of his space she already spit on him the whole time swearing at him and saying what she would do to him and his mother and she put her hands on him, if she had a weapon, someone who has gone that far could and would easily use it.

We say his life was in no danger because of what we know after the fact, Many people are killed in similar social situations not thinking their life was in danger or didnt see the warning signals

In those videos I post where these strong women were beating the men, did they have a right to hit the women or were their lives not in danger so should have taken it and tried to run?

Again, you are confusing a social situation where both people are or can be the assailants, vs domestic abuse situations

Until the women got hit in the video are u seriously seeing her as the victim even though she was the initial batterer. There is no way you can compare her to those women in shelters. And I know women who were beaten and abused so I dont need to accompany you

I also know men/husbands who were beat and abused by their wives who had to suck it up

Yep - women ARE physically weaker than men. Not every woman is physically weaker than every man, but I don't think anyone in the world would argue with the position that taken as a whole, men are stronger physically than women.

But by no means do I think women are helpless. There's absolutely no reason why we can't have female fighter pilots that are every bit as good as male fighter pilots. Or female bomber pilots, or drone operators, or tank commanders. There's no doubt in my mind women have what it takes inside to do those jobs as well as men.

And I certainly don't think women are inferior. I'm amused at how you paint with such a broad brush, and extrapolate ridiculous positions from one set of facts. Heck, my wife out-earns me! And I'm proud to admit it. She's far smarter than I am, and is probably the leading expert in her field in the whole country, if not the world. I'll never be able to say that about myself in anything, and I have absolutely no problem with this.

If the woman in video had a knife? Well, haven't I already said about a half dozen times that I do think it's OK for a man defend himself in any way necessary if his life is threatened?

LOL, I'm chuckling that you think I or anyone else has ever said that if a woman is beating up a man, he should just take it. That's probably the best joke I'll read today! (No disrespect to funkpill, LOL.) I hope that you're smart enough to figure out what I think those men should have done.

The bus driver should have called the police. In fact, more than once in that video you can hear people telling the girl that she's going to jail.

Here's the bottom line - if people think it's OK for a man to hit a woman in a non-life-threatening situation, then at some point they're going to see a battered woman and think, "Well, she probably deserved it".

.

[Edited 10/26/12 5:30am]

JustErin said:

Tremolina said:

Yeah, that conversation never happened. Not with him or anyone.

I never said it did. I asked if I was remembering correctly.

Have I told you lately how much you remind me of Alanis Morrissette?

TonyVanDam said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

and those are the issues ... Rodeo cant bring up manhood "gentleman" without bringing up ladylike

and these ideals are very entrenched in peoples minds which brings into question again what or where is the equalizer

these ideals that in a lot of ways have not changed in the advent of the independent woman

And regardless of what Stymie thinks of me during the aftermaths of this thread, I do NOT have a negative mentiality of all women. That charage is definitely bullshit.

When I watched that video, I simply judge the individual based upon the context of her character. She conduct herself just like a woman that was within the stereotype of a hoodrat (IMHO). And I will never apology to anyone in this thread for being brutally honest.

people know what a hoodrat is, and yeah she was acting like a hoodrat

an older person would have to really go beyond the 10power of craziness for me to talk to them

the way she talked to that man in the video

hoodrats give a rats azz about age, they'll rob them, curse them, abuse them etc they don't discriminate

RodeoSchro said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

as I said, your ideals hearken to the ideal that women need protection ie because they are weaker and helpless.

These ideals that you hold and many of us do come from that ideal that women are inferior to men

think I was pretty clear in my post about what and who can determine what concludes someones life being in danger

We look at what the woman did in the video, now what if she had a knife? she already refused to get behind the line, already refused to get out of his space she already spit on him the whole time swearing at him and saying what she would do to him and his mother and she put her hands on him, if she had a weapon, someone who has gone that far could and would easily use it.

We say his life was in no danger because of what we know after the fact, Many people are killed in similar social situations not thinking their life was in danger or didnt see the warning signals

In those videos I post where these strong women were beating the men, did they have a right to hit the women or were their lives not in danger so should have taken it and tried to run?

Again, you are confusing a social situation where both people are or can be the assailants, vs domestic abuse situations

Until the women got hit in the video are u seriously seeing her as the victim even though she was the initial batterer. There is no way you can compare her to those women in shelters. And I know women who were beaten and abused so I dont need to accompany you

I also know men/husbands who were beat and abused by their wives who had to suck it up

Yep - women ARE physically weaker than men. Not every woman is physically weaker than every man, but I don't think anyone in the world would argue with the position that taken as a whole, men are stronger physically than women.

But by no means do I think women are helpless. There's absolutely no reason why we can't have female fighter pilots that are every bit as good as male fighter pilots. Or female bomber pilots, or drone operators, or tank commanders. There's no doubt in my mind women have what it takes inside to do those jobs as well as men.

And I certainly don't think women are inferior. I'm amused at how you paint with such a broad brush, and extrapolate ridiculous positions from one set of facts. Heck, my wife out-earns me! And I'm proud to admit it. She's far smarter than I am, and is probably the leading expert in her field in the whole country, if not the world. I'll never be able to say that about myself in anything, and I have absolutely no problem with this.

If the woman in video had a knife? Well, haven't I already said about a half dozen times that I do think it's OK for a man defend himself in any way necessary if his life is threatened?

LOL, I'm chuckling that you think I or anyone else has ever said that if a woman is beating up a man, he should just take it. That's probably the best joke I'll read today! (No disrespect to funkpill, LOL.) I hope that you're smart enough to figure out what I think those men should have done.

The bus driver should have called the police. In fact, more than once in that video you can hear people telling the girl that she's going to jail.

Here's the bottom line - if people think it's OK for a man to hit a woman in a non-life-threatening situation, then at some point they're going to see a battered woman and think, "Well, she probably deserved it".

.

[Edited 10/26/12 5:30am]

reply 152

[Edited 10/26/12 5:55am]

johnart said:

Stymie said:

I have never ever had a fight in my life. I don't believe violence solves anything and makes matters worse. In this particular instance, I am right.

I'm not a violent person but I do think that on occasion (not saying this particular instance) standing up to a bully (which sometimes might take a punch to the mouth) can solve a thing or two.

I totally agree

Bully's usually operate on peoples fear

they go the distance they do because no one challenges them

Many Bully's grow up and become Adult Bully's

OldFriends4Sale said:

RodeoSchro said:

Yep - women ARE physically weaker than men. Not every woman is physically weaker than every man, but I don't think anyone in the world would argue with the position that taken as a whole, men are stronger physically than women.

But by no means do I think women are helpless. There's absolutely no reason why we can't have female fighter pilots that are every bit as good as male fighter pilots. Or female bomber pilots, or drone operators, or tank commanders. There's no doubt in my mind women have what it takes inside to do those jobs as well as men.

And I certainly don't think women are inferior. I'm amused at how you paint with such a broad brush, and extrapolate ridiculous positions from one set of facts. Heck, my wife out-earns me! And I'm proud to admit it. She's far smarter than I am, and is probably the leading expert in her field in the whole country, if not the world. I'll never be able to say that about myself in anything, and I have absolutely no problem with this.

If the woman in video had a knife? Well, haven't I already said about a half dozen times that I do think it's OK for a man defend himself in any way necessary if his life is threatened?

LOL, I'm chuckling that you think I or anyone else has ever said that if a woman is beating up a man, he should just take it. That's probably the best joke I'll read today! (No disrespect to funkpill, LOL.) I hope that you're smart enough to figure out what I think those men should have done.

The bus driver should have called the police. In fact, more than once in that video you can hear people telling the girl that she's going to jail.

Here's the bottom line - if people think it's OK for a man to hit a woman in a non-life-threatening situation, then at some point they're going to see a battered woman and think, "Well, she probably deserved it".

.

[Edited 10/26/12 5:30am]

reply 152

I just watched that video for the first time.

Good lord! I wish I had been there. I'd have beat that bus driver senseless. What a POS he is.

No man hits a woman. EVER.

#168

There's no way we can justify that man hitting that woman, short of her presenting a life-threatening situation to him.

Men do not hit women. EVER.

#239

Tony, any man that strikes a woman for any reason other than to prevent her from killing him is a pussy.

There it is.

My issue with your thought is that how do you determine what is life threatening?

That 1st video of the big woman beating her (partner) would you consider that one 'life threatening'? or the 2nd one?

I mean any one of those could have resulted in the mans death

What can look like 'just an altercation' can easily lead to death

My life will always be more important than someone elses

"Mr & Mrs Cook, sorry to inform you your son died as a result of blows to his skull by his girlfriend..."

"she punches him, hits him knocks him down he hits his head on the corner of the sidewalk, corner of something, falls on a sharp object"

My point is its too hard to determine, especially in a situation what is life threatening or not, until after it's over

You missed my point about the woman in the video possibly having a knife.

If she had a hidden weapon, and wanted to stab him in that circumstance, he would not know the threat till it's too late, that whole time he was in his seat he was in a vulnerable position, even after he got up if she had a knife she would have the upper hand, and by the way she took that punch and got back up swinging showed she wasn't some weakling

I think you're assigning a position to me that I do not have. That is, that if a woman wants to strike a man, he should let her do it. You posted some of my replies but I've also said that if a man is attacked by a woman with her fists, he can block the punches, grab her, duck, run, push her away - whatever it takes without hitting her. Most men are going to avoid the punches and then get away from the woman.

I addressed your comment about the knife. If she'd had a knife she would have used it long before she got punched. The bus driver - who was closer to her than anyone - didn't think she had a knife.

If we are agreeing that a man can hit only a woman if he feels his life is being threatened, then our only issue is - what defines "life-threatening"? That's cool.

Let's talk about how much JustErin looks like Alanis Morrissette!

.

[Edited 10/26/12 5:57am]

Dave1992 said:

Mind you, though, I would never say that any aggressive reaction is "okay" under any circumstance. I just think that my personal mental strength might not always keep up with my idealistic opinions.

So, to make things clear: do I think that it is okay to hit anyone? No, of course not. And women even less so, just because they are women. They can argue about being "equals" and all that shit, but the fact remains that women are at least equal to men, in the sense they often convey a certain breathtaking elegance and beauty. I know that a woman spitting on and hitting me certainly has absolutely none of that, but she's still a woman which somehow tells me I have to treat her better that I'd treat the same kind of asshole if they were in a man's body. If that makes sense...?

But: am I convinced I will always react the way I would want to (solve the situation without hitting anyone? No, because I have failed in that respect many, many times before.

RodeoSchro said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

reply 152

I just watched that video for the first time.

Good lord! I wish I had been there. I'd have beat that bus driver senseless. What a POS he is.

No man hits a woman. EVER.

#168

There's no way we can justify that man hitting that woman, short of her presenting a life-threatening situation to him.

Men do not hit women. EVER.

#239

Tony, any man that strikes a woman for any reason other than to prevent her from killing him is a pussy.

There it is.

My issue with your thought is that how do you determine what is life threatening?

That 1st video of the big woman beating her (partner) would you consider that one 'life threatening'? or the 2nd one?

I mean any one of those could have resulted in the mans death

What can look like 'just an altercation' can easily lead to death

My life will always be more important than someone elses

"Mr & Mrs Cook, sorry to inform you your son died as a result of blows to his skull by his girlfriend..."

"she punches him, hits him knocks him down he hits his head on the corner of the sidewalk, corner of something, falls on a sharp object"

My point is its too hard to determine, especially in a situation what is life threatening or not, until after it's over

You missed my point about the woman in the video possibly having a knife.

If she had a hidden weapon, and wanted to stab him in that circumstance, he would not know the threat till it's too late, that whole time he was in his seat he was in a vulnerable position, even after he got up if she had a knife she would have the upper hand, and by the way she took that punch and got back up swinging showed she wasn't some weakling

I think you're assigning a position to me that I do not have. That is, that if a woman wants to strike a man, he should let her do it. You posted some of my replies but I've also said that if a man is attacked by a woman with her fists, he can block the punches, grab her, duck, run, push her away - whatever it takes without hitting her. Most men are going to avoid the punches and then get away from the woman.

I addressed your comment about the knife. If she'd had a knife she would have used it long before she got punched. The bus driver - who was closer to her than anyone - didn't think she had a knife.

If we are agreeing that a man can hit only a woman if he feels his life is being threatened, then our only issue is - what defines "life-threatening"? That's cool.

Let's talk about how much JustErin looks like Alanis Morrissette!

.

[Edited 10/26/12 5:57am]

Unless her intent was originally to stab someone, a situation like this is a progression, when she put her hands on him then moved back would have been the time she would have gotten the knife, not when the disagreement 1st started. Again unless her intent was to get on that bus and stick someone

situations like this are always progression. arguement/disagreement -> swear words/curse words -> physical assualt -> knife or gun or other weapon

Think about the Trayvon case. He had a gun for whatever reason, the situation (much different than this) but still a progression escalating to someones death

Ok now you can compare JustErin 2 Alanis Morrissette lol

Timmy84 said:

TonyVanDam said:

And regardless of what Stymie thinks of me during the aftermaths of this thread, I do NOT have a negative mentiality of all women. That charage is definitely bullshit.

When I watched that video, I simply judge the individual based upon the context of her character. She conduct herself just like a woman that was within the stereotype of a hoodrat (IMHO). And I will never apology to anyone in this thread for being brutally honest.

To paraphrase the great Dr. King, don't judge them from their femininity but for the content of their character...

A lot of women who act like this one on the bus are banking on the notion that a man won't hit them. It gives them a safety net to act as out of control as they can get away with. Every so often they find out that some dudes don't heed that "don't hit a woman" policy. It usually shocks some sense back into them.

As for the specific situation, if you're messing with the man driving the bus then you're potentially messing with the lives of every passenger on that bus. She got what she deserved. I was surprised someone on the bus didn't check her first.

Assault

An assault invoves:

1. An intentional, unlawful threat or "offer" to cause bodily injury to another by force;
2. Under circumstances which create in the other person a well-founded fear of imminent peril;
3. Where there exists the apparent present ability to carry out the act if not prevented.

Note that an assault can be completed even if there is no actual contact with the plaintiff, and even if the defendant had no actual ability to carry out the apparent threat. For example, a defendant who points a realistic toy gun at the plaintiff may be liable for assault, even though the defendant was fifty feet away from the plaintiff and had no actual ability to inflict harm from that distance.

It depends upon your state what constitutes assault. In NC, putting your hands on the individual is automatic assault, even without no injuries, just merely touching them.

In NY, injuries constitutes assault, but not only that, spitting on a individual is assault. Also, both parties would have been wheeled into the jailhouse. No excuses.

Waving a toy gun or gun period is menacing, according to NY law. Don't know Ohio laws, and that's for the judge to decide.

Yeah we're more conservative in how we deal with shit like that... it's good that way. Ohio's not as conservative I don't think.